Engineer B Confidentiality Scope Limit
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/15#Engineer_B_Confidentiality_Scope_Limit
Definition
Engineer B's confidentiality obligation to the Owner covered the contents and findings of the peer review but did not extend to concealing the existence of the review from Engineer A, because NSPE III.7.a requires that the reviewed engineer have knowledge of the review.
Properties
Instance of
PeerReviewConfidentialityScopeObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#PeerReviewConfidentialityScopeObligation
Case context
Owner sought to impose a confidentiality arrangement on Engineer B that would have prevented notification to Engineer A of the peer review. Engineer B correctly identified that this exceeded the permissible scope of the confidentiality obligation.
Compliance status
met
Confidence
0.88
Obligation statement
Engineer B's confidentiality obligation to the Owner covered the contents and findings of the peer review but did not extend to concealing the existence of the review from Engineer A, because NSPE III.7.a requires that the reviewed engineer have knowledge of the review.
Temporal scope
Throughout the peer review engagement
Match Confidence
0.76
Match Reasoning
Via class 'Peer Review Confidentiality Scope Obligation': This is a bounded specialization of the Confidentiality Obligation, distinguished by the specific limit that confidentiality in peer review contexts does not override the collegial notification requirement of NSPE III.7.a. It is a defeasible variant with a defined scope boundary.
Matched Ontology Label
Confidentiality Obligation
Matches Existing
true
Synthesis Literal
caseContext
complianceStatus
confidence
obligationClass
obligationStatement
temporalScope
textReferences
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Engineer A Public Safety Risk
obligatedParty
Agent Engineer B
derivedFromPrinciple
Engineer B Confidentiality Review Scope
Source Evidence
Text references
Engineer B was completely correct in declining an assignment to conduct a peer review of Engineer A's work subject to an instruction not to disclose the peer review to Engineer A.
Frequently that disclosure is accompanied by an agreement that the client will require the peer reviewer to keep the results of the peer review confidential or, at the very least, the original designer will be provided with an opportunity to explain (and defend) the design decisions.
Such confidentiality agreements encourage the firm being reviewed to cooperate fully, build trust, and support a collegial atmosphere.
Source text
Frequently that disclosure is accompanied by an agreement that the client will require the peer reviewer to keep the results of the peer review confidential or, at the very least, the original designer will be provided with an opportunity to explain (and defend) the design decisions.
TTL
@prefix case15: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/15#> .
@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 proeth-prov: <http://proethica.org/provenance#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case15:Engineer_B_Confidentiality_Scope_Limit a proeth:PeerReviewConfidentialityScopeObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer B Confidentiality Scope Limit" ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case15:Engineer_A_Public_Safety_Risk ;
proeth-core:obligatedParty case15:Agent_Engineer_B ;
proeth:caseContext "Owner sought to impose a confidentiality arrangement on Engineer B that would have prevented notification to Engineer A of the peer review. Engineer B correctly identified that this exceeded the permissible scope of the confidentiality obligation." ;
proeth:complianceStatus "met" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.88" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case15:Engineer_B_Confidentiality_Review_Scope ;
proeth:obligatedParty "Engineer B" ;
proeth:obligationClass "Peer Review Confidentiality Scope Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationStatement "Engineer B's confidentiality obligation to the Owner covered the contents and findings of the peer review but did not extend to concealing the existence of the review from Engineer A, because NSPE III.7.a requires that the reviewed engineer have knowledge of the review." ;
proeth:temporalScope "Throughout the peer review engagement" ;
proeth:textReferences "Engineer B was completely correct in declining an assignment to conduct a peer review of Engineer A's work subject to an instruction not to disclose the peer review to Engineer A.",
"Frequently that disclosure is accompanied by an agreement that the client will require the peer reviewer to keep the results of the peer review confidential or, at the very least, the original designer will be provided with an opportunity to explain (and defend) the design decisions.",
"Such confidentiality agreements encourage the firm being reviewed to cooperate fully, build trust, and support a collegial atmosphere." ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInCase 15 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInPass 2 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInSection "discussion" ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredAt "2026-06-02T19:59:48.608792+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredInCase 15 ;
proeth-prov:matchConfidence 0.76 ;
proeth-prov:matchReasoning "Via class 'Peer Review Confidentiality Scope Obligation': This is a bounded specialization of the Confidentiality Obligation, distinguished by the specific limit that confidentiality in peer review contexts does not override the collegial notification requirement of NSPE III.7.a. It is a defeasible variant with a defined scope boundary." ;
proeth-prov:matchedOntologyClass proeth:ConfidentialityObligation ;
proeth-prov:matchedOntologyLabel "Confidentiality Obligation" ;
proeth-prov:matchesExisting true ;
proeth-prov:sourceText "Frequently that disclosure is accompanied by an agreement that the client will require the peer reviewer to keep the results of the peer review confidential or, at the very least, the original designer will be provided with an opportunity to explain (and defend) the design decisions." ;
proeth-prov:synthesisLiteral "caseContext",
"complianceStatus",
"confidence",
"obligationClass",
"obligationStatement",
"temporalScope",
"textReferences" ;
rdfs:comment "Engineer B's confidentiality obligation to the Owner covered the contents and findings of the peer review but did not extend to concealing the existence of the review from Engineer A, because NSPE III.7.a requires that the reviewed engineer have knowledge of the review." ;
skos:definition "Engineer B's confidentiality obligation to the Owner covered the contents and findings of the peer review but did not extend to concealing the existence of the review from Engineer A, because NSPE III.7.a requires that the reviewed engineer have knowledge of the review." ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-06-02T19:59:48.608792+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "Case 15 Extraction",
"claude-sonnet-4-6" ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 15 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
15
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-06-02T19:59:48.608792+00:00
First case
15
Generated
2026-06-02T19:59:48.608792+00:00
Attributed to
['Case 15 Extraction', 'claude-sonnet-4-6']
Generated by
ProEthica Case 15 Extraction