Allegation-Adjudication Distinction Invoked by Engineer A Non-Disclosure Decision
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/147#Allegation-Adjudication_Distinction_Invoked_by_Engineer_A_Non-Disclosure_Decision
Properties
Instance of
Allegation-AdjudicationDistinctioninDisclosureObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Allegation-AdjudicationDistinctioninDisclosureObligation
Applied to
Decision whether to disclose Client C's pending competence complaint to Client B
Balancing with
Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits
Pending Competence Complaint Disclosure Obligation to Current Client
Concrete expression
Engineer A determined that the pending ethics complaint — an unproven allegation by Client C — did not require disclosure to Client B, reasoning that an unresolved complaint is not an adjudicated finding of wrongdoing.
Confidence
0.88
Importance
high
Interpretation
In this context, the principle supports Engineer A's position that a mere allegation does not compel disclosure; however, the Board's analysis suggests this principle does not fully resolve the question when the complaint concerns competence for materially similar services actively being rendered.
Invoked by
Engineer A Ethics Complaint Non-Disclosing Engineer
Tension resolution
The Allegation-Adjudication Distinction provides partial support for non-disclosure but is overridden by the faithful agent and informed decision-making obligations when the complaint directly concerns competence for the same type of services currently being rendered.
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer A does not believe it is necessary to notify Client B of the pending complaint.
Text references
Client C alleges that Engineer A lacked the competence to perform the services in question
Engineer A does not believe it is necessary to notify Client B of the pending complaint
TTL
@prefix case147: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/147#> .
@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#> .
case147:Allegation-Adjudication_Distinction_Invoked_by_Engineer_A_Non-Disclosure_Decision a proeth:Allegation-AdjudicationDistinctioninDisclosureObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Allegation-Adjudication Distinction Invoked by Engineer A Non-Disclosure Decision" ;
proeth:appliedto "Decision whether to disclose Client C's pending competence complaint to Client B" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits",
"Pending Competence Complaint Disclosure Obligation to Current Client" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer A determined that the pending ethics complaint — an unproven allegation by Client C — did not require disclosure to Client B, reasoning that an unresolved complaint is not an adjudicated finding of wrongdoing." ;
proeth:confidence "0.88" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "147" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T07:37:51.889344+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "147" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T07:37:51.889344+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "In this context, the principle supports Engineer A's position that a mere allegation does not compel disclosure; however, the Board's analysis suggests this principle does not fully resolve the question when the complaint concerns competence for materially similar services actively being rendered." ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer A Ethics Complaint Non-Disclosing Engineer" ;
proeth:principleclass "Allegation-Adjudication Distinction in Disclosure Obligation" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer A does not believe it is necessary to notify Client B of the pending complaint." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The Allegation-Adjudication Distinction provides partial support for non-disclosure but is overridden by the faithful agent and informed decision-making obligations when the complaint directly concerns competence for the same type of services currently being rendered." ;
proeth:textreferences "Client C alleges that Engineer A lacked the competence to perform the services in question",
"Engineer A does not believe it is necessary to notify Client B of the pending complaint" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 147 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T07:56:55.830364"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 147 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
147
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-01T07:37:51.889344+00:00
First case
147
Generated
2026-03-01T07:37:51.889344+00:00
Attributed to
Case 147 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T07:56:55.830364
Generated by
ProEthica Case 147 Extraction