Much like in electronic circuits, it all comes down to what the building has been designed to withstand and/or whether or not those specs were followed through during the construction phase. Many things can go wrong in a building, anything from the engineers miscalculating the forces involved to the contractors skimping on material quality during construction, or even unpredictable circumstances.
When it comes to earthquakes, the "forces involved" part is an extremely grey and vast area, simply because earthquakes are very unpredictable forces, being a phenomenon which is not yet fully understood. In the OP example, that building collapse doesn't mean there was necessarily malpractice. It could simply be that the building code model used was not enough to guarantee that the building would withstand the forces involved in that particular earthquake. The Kobe earthquake of 1995 was a prime example of that. The building code used up until that point was simply not enough. It wasn't malpractice, just that until that point no one really knew that an earthquake of that (relatively low) magnitude could cause the type of damage that it did. It proved that our understanding of all the natural forces is still rather incomplete.
Edit: I didn't see the link that shows the article where the pictures came from when I posted my reply. After reading it, to me it is a case of irresponsible/incorrect procedures used on site. This would classify as an "unforeseen circumstance".