The architect and the client cannot agree on a design

Room sizes cannot necessarily be specified in advance, as they only result from the planning. If at all, only rough directions, e.g. living room with dining area at least 40m² or the children's rooms not less than 12m².

Concrete planning specifications would be, for example, a from-to size of the living area or a construction budget. In the latter case, you have to distinguish whether it is "just" a budget or an absolute cost cap. The latter would have to be explicitly designated as such in the architect contract and applies without tolerance. A "normal" specification of the construction sum, on the other hand, is only a guideline for the planning, because at this early stage the exact costs cannot yet be estimated. Therefore, very wide tolerances apply to these specifications, well beyond the stated 10%.

You can also conclude a contract orally. Acquisition is at most a quick line drawing of the floor plans or rough sketches from a conversation. Everything else is chargeable planning service unless otherwise agreed. Compensation is stated in the HOAI.

If no agreement can be reached at all, the contract will be terminated and the services rendered must be compensated (simplified). Depending on whether and what contractual arrangements exist, these can be the completed service phases or lost profits for further services.

As I wrote above, the architect also has little desire left

Usually, the architect will then also have little interest in a court case and an agreement is reached.

Whereas I actually wonder how it is: let's assume the client and the architect keep dragging it out forever?

If the positions are too far apart, the architect will send an invoice. The client does not pay it. Reminder - judicial dunning process - objection - lawsuit - judgment - title - bailiff

Usually, the architect will then have little interest in a court case and an agreement is reached.

If the positions are too far apart, the architect will issue an invoice. The client will not pay it. Reminder - judicial dunning procedure - objection - lawsuit - judgment - enforceable title - bailiff

:D For me, the topic was more about the first option, the client and architect can (still) talk to each other.

But in general, consumer protection in architect relationships seems to me to be comparatively very, very low compared to other industries, right?

You really think so? Take your case and instead of an architect, use any craftsman. All specifications are essentially met and it "doesn't please". The results are not that far apart.

edit: take for example a "Freiberufler IT", software works, but doesn't please :D

But generally, consumer protection in architect relationships seems to me to be comparatively very low compared to other industries, doesn't it?

Except for surveyors of course :-) but that applies to all freelancers. Only with the doctor does your health insurance pay, with the lawyer perhaps the legal insurance. But if you commission a portrait from the painter, he also sits in front of the easel for days. It would be unfair if he doesn't get paid just because you don't like it.