BER 89-7 Engineer Brief Report Mention Insufficiency Safety Notification
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/137#BER_89-7_Engineer_Brief_Report_Mention_Insufficiency_Safety_Notification
Properties
Instance of
BriefReportMentionInsufficiencyforPublicAuthoritySafetyNotificationObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#BriefReportMentionInsufficiencyforPublicAuthoritySafetyNotificationObligation
Case context
BER Case No. 89-7: An engineer retained to assess structural integrity of an occupied apartment building discovered electrical and mechanical code violations; he made only a brief mention in his confidential report and did not report to public authorities.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.93
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer (BER Case No. 89-7)
Obligation statement
The engineer in BER 89-7 was obligated to recognize that a brief mention of electrical and mechanical code violations in a confidential client report did not constitute adequate discharge of the duty to notify appropriate public authorities of the safety hazard.
Temporal scope
Upon completing the structural report and discovering the code violations
Relationships
derivedFromPrinciple
Confidentiality Agreement Non-Supersession Invoked in BER 89-7
Source Evidence
Source text
In his report, the engineer made a brief mention of his conversation with the client concerning the deficiencies; however, in view of the terms of the agreement, the engineer did not report the safety violations to any third parties.
Text references
In determining that it was unethical for the engineer not to report the safety violations to appropriate public authorities...
In his report, the engineer made a brief mention of his conversation with the client concerning the deficiencies; however, in view of the terms of the agreement, the engineer did not report the safety violations to any third parties.
TTL
@prefix case137: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/137#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@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#> .
case137:BER_89-7_Engineer_Brief_Report_Mention_Insufficiency_Safety_Notification a proeth:BriefReportMentionInsufficiencyforPublicAuthoritySafetyNotificationObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "BER 89-7 Engineer Brief Report Mention Insufficiency Safety Notification" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case137:BER_89-7_Engineer_Confidentiality_Non-Override_Structural_Safety ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case137:BER_89-7_Confidentiality_Agreement_Suppressing_Occupant_Safety_Report ;
proeth:casecontext "BER Case No. 89-7: An engineer retained to assess structural integrity of an occupied apartment building discovered electrical and mechanical code violations; he made only a brief mention in his confidential report and did not report to public authorities." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.93" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case137:Confidentiality_Agreement_Non-Supersession_Invoked_in_BER_89-7 ;
proeth:discoveredincase "137" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T05:33:27.923922+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "137" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T05:33:27.923922+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer (BER Case No. 89-7)" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Brief Report Mention Insufficiency for Public Authority Safety Notification Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "The engineer in BER 89-7 was obligated to recognize that a brief mention of electrical and mechanical code violations in a confidential client report did not constitute adequate discharge of the duty to notify appropriate public authorities of the safety hazard." ;
proeth:sourcetext "In his report, the engineer made a brief mention of his conversation with the client concerning the deficiencies; however, in view of the terms of the agreement, the engineer did not report the safety violations to any third parties." ;
proeth:temporalscope "Upon completing the structural report and discovering the code violations" ;
proeth:textreferences "In determining that it was unethical for the engineer not to report the safety violations to appropriate public authorities...",
"In his report, the engineer made a brief mention of his conversation with the client concerning the deficiencies; however, in view of the terms of the agreement, the engineer did not report the safety violations to any third parties." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 137 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T05:45:21.971056"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 137 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
137
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T05:33:27.923922+00:00
First case
137
Generated
2026-03-01T05:33:27.923922+00:00
Attributed to
Case 137 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T05:45:21.971056
Generated by
ProEthica Case 137 Extraction