Franchiser Peer Review Procedural Fairness Non-Compliance Covert Instruction

O · Obligation Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/126#Franchiser_Peer_Review_Procedural_Fairness_Non-Compliance_Covert_Instruction
Properties
Instance of
PeerReviewProceduralFairnessClientObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#PeerReviewProceduralFairnessClientObligation
Case context
The franchiser explicitly instructed Engineer B not to disclose the review engagement to Engineer A, thereby directing Engineer B to conduct a covert review of an active incumbent engineer's work — a violation of the franchiser's own obligation to ensure procedurally fair peer review.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.91
Importance
high
Obligated party
Franchiser
Obligation statement
The franchiser was obligated to refrain from instructing Engineer B to conduct the peer review of Engineer A's active work covertly, and to ensure that the peer review was conducted through procedurally fair means including notification of Engineer A before the review commenced.
Temporal scope
Prior to retaining Engineer B and issuing confidentiality instructions
Source Evidence
Source text
franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser

Text references
franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser
TTL
@prefix case126: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/126#> . @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> . @prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> . @prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> . @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> . @prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> . case126:Franchiser_Peer_Review_Procedural_Fairness_Non-Compliance_Covert_Instruction a proeth:PeerReviewProceduralFairnessClientObligation, owl:NamedIndividual ; rdfs:label "Franchiser Peer Review Procedural Fairness Non-Compliance Covert Instruction" ; proeth:casecontext "The franchiser explicitly instructed Engineer B not to disclose the review engagement to Engineer A, thereby directing Engineer B to conduct a covert review of an active incumbent engineer's work — a violation of the franchiser's own obligation to ensure procedurally fair peer review." ; proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ; proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ; proeth:confidence "0.91" ; proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case126:Professional_Dignity_Invoked_For_Engineer_A_As_Incumbent_Subject_To_Covert_Review ; proeth:discoveredincase "126" ; proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ; proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T10:15:07.500687+00:00" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "126" ; proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T10:15:07.500687+00:00" ; proeth:importance "high" ; proeth:obligatedparty "Franchiser" ; proeth:obligationclass "Peer Review Procedural Fairness Client Obligation" ; proeth:obligationstatement "The franchiser was obligated to refrain from instructing Engineer B to conduct the peer review of Engineer A's active work covertly, and to ensure that the peer review was conducted through procedurally fair means including notification of Engineer A before the review commenced." ; proeth:sourcetext "franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser" ; proeth:temporalscope "Prior to retaining Engineer B and issuing confidentiality instructions" ; proeth:textreferences "franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser" ; proeth:wasattributedto "Case 126 Extraction" ; prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T10:31:55.145452"^^xsd:dateTime ; prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 126 Extraction" .
Metadata
Type
Individual
Last Updated
2026-05-28 16:26
Discovered in case
126
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-01T10:15:07.500687+00:00
First case
126
Generated
2026-03-01T10:15:07.500687+00:00
Attributed to
Case 126 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T10:31:55.145452
Generated by
ProEthica Case 126 Extraction