In Hattis Associates, Inc. v. Metro Sports, Inc., 34 Ill. App. 3d 125, 339 N.E.2d 270 (1975), the vice-president and managing agent of an architectural firm was licensed, but the firm was not registered. The Hattis court ruled that the contract underlying a mechanic's lien was valid because the architectural work was done under the supervision of a licensed architect. Hattis, 34 Ill. App. 3d 125, 339 N.E.2d 270. The Hattis court noted that the purpose of the Act is not to protect architects, but rather to protect the public from possible damage from the work of incompetent and unlicensed architects. Hattis, 34 Ill. App. 3d 125, 339 N.E.2d 270. Furthermore, the Act states the following regarding its public policy: "The practice of architecture in the State of Illinois is hereby declared to affect the public health, safety and welfare and to be subject to regulation and control in the public interest. It is a matter of public interest and concern that the practice of architecture merit and receive the confidence of the public, and that only qualified persons be authorized to practice architecture in the State of Illinois." 225 ILCS 305/2 (West 2002).