Investor vs. Designer – Common Misunderstandings

The same questions regularly arise throughout the investment process, particularly those concerning building law, the designer’s responsibility, and copyright in architectural designs:

1. Building law does not operate on a “turning a blind eye” basis
Both the design and the implementation of an investment project must comply with applicable regulations, and compliance is generally assessed in binary terms. Non-compliance may result in additional construction works, revisions to the design documentation, as well as administrative and financial consequences.

2. “It’s my property” does not mean complete freedom of action
Ownership does not give the right to freely alter a building or change its use. Regulations protect, among other things, user safety, neighbouring properties, the environment, heritage assets and spatial order.

3. Active involvement of the investor does not mean co-authorship of the design
The investor defines the needs and budget and makes business decisions, but this does not automatically make them a co-author of the design documentation.

4. “I paid for the design” does not mean “I can do whatever I want with it”
The scope of rights to the design should be clearly defined in the contract. This may include, for example, modifications to the documentation and the completed project, transferring it to other designers, reusing it, or access to editable source files.