Former-Client Solicitation Permissibility Invoked for Firm B Engineers
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/168#Former-Client_Solicitation_Permissibility_Invoked_for_Firm_B_Engineers
Properties
Instance of
Former-ClientSolicitationWithoutActive-ContractSupplantingPermissibilityPrinciple
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Former-ClientSolicitationWithoutActive-ContractSupplantingPermissibilityPrinciple
Applied to
Solicitation of former clients of Engineer A by Firm B
Balancing with
Fairness in Professional Competition
Loyalty
Concrete expression
The four engineers of Firm B had a right to seek assignments from former clients of Engineer A because Engineer A had no existing contract and was not engaged in negotiations for a particular project with those clients at the time of Firm B's solicitation
Confidence
0.95
Importance
high
Interpretation
The supplanting prohibition applies only when the complaining engineer has a contract for the work or has been selected for negotiation for the particular work; absent those conditions, solicitation of former clients is permissible competitive activity
Invoked by
Four Departing Engineers Firm B Principals
Tension resolution
Free and open competition prevails where no active contractual or negotiation relationship exists; the supplanting rule does not create a proprietary right over former clients
Source Evidence
Source text
To that extent, and under those facts, the four engineers of Firm B had a right to seek assignments from the former clients of Engineer A.
Text references
Engineer A did not have an existing contract, nor was he engaged in negotiations for a particular project relative to the contacts made by Firm B with former clients of Engineer A.
To that extent, and under those facts, the four engineers of Firm B had a right to seek assignments from the former clients of Engineer A.
for the supplanting standard to apply the facts must demonstrate that the complaining engineer either had a contract for the work, or had been selected for negotiation by the client for the particular work
TTL
@prefix case168: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/168#> .
@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#> .
case168:Former-Client_Solicitation_Permissibility_Invoked_for_Firm_B_Engineers a proeth:Former-ClientSolicitationWithoutActive-ContractSupplantingPermissibilityPrinciple,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Former-Client Solicitation Permissibility Invoked for Firm B Engineers" ;
proeth:appliedto "Solicitation of former clients of Engineer A by Firm B" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Fairness in Professional Competition",
"Loyalty" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "The four engineers of Firm B had a right to seek assignments from former clients of Engineer A because Engineer A had no existing contract and was not engaged in negotiations for a particular project with those clients at the time of Firm B's solicitation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.95" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "168" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-02T02:46:59.536015+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "168" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-02T02:46:59.536015+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The supplanting prohibition applies only when the complaining engineer has a contract for the work or has been selected for negotiation for the particular work; absent those conditions, solicitation of former clients is permissible competitive activity" ;
proeth:invokedby "Four Departing Engineers Firm B Principals" ;
proeth:principleclass "Former-Client Solicitation Without Active-Contract Supplanting Permissibility Principle" ;
proeth:sourcetext "To that extent, and under those facts, the four engineers of Firm B had a right to seek assignments from the former clients of Engineer A." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "Free and open competition prevails where no active contractual or negotiation relationship exists; the supplanting rule does not create a proprietary right over former clients" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A did not have an existing contract, nor was he engaged in negotiations for a particular project relative to the contacts made by Firm B with former clients of Engineer A.",
"To that extent, and under those facts, the four engineers of Firm B had a right to seek assignments from the former clients of Engineer A.",
"for the supplanting standard to apply the facts must demonstrate that the complaining engineer either had a contract for the work, or had been selected for negotiation by the client for the particular work" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 168 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-02T02:59:28.929643"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 168 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
168
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-02T02:46:59.536015+00:00
First case
168
Generated
2026-03-02T02:46:59.536015+00:00
Attributed to
Case 168 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-02T02:59:28.929643
Generated by
ProEthica Case 168 Extraction