Engineer B Post-Completion Terminated-Relationship Review Without Notification Permissibility

O · Obligation Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/169#Engineer_B_Post-Completion_Terminated-Relationship_Review_Without_Notification_Permissibility
Properties
Instance of
Post-CompletionTerminated-RelationshipReviewWithoutIncumbentNotificationPermissibilityObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Post-CompletionTerminated-RelationshipReviewWithoutIncumbentNotificationPermissibilityObligation
Case context
Engineer A alleged Engineer B obtained employment by a questionable method of criticizing Engineer A without his knowledge; however, Engineer A had been fully paid and the project completed seven years prior, with ownership having since changed.
Compliance status
met
Confidence
0.9
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer B
Obligation statement
Engineer B was not ethically required to notify Engineer A before commencing the post-occupancy inspection, because Engineer A's contractual relationship with the project had been fully completed and terminated through full payment years prior to the review; the NSPE III.8.a notification requirement does not apply to engineers whose connection with the work has been terminated.
Temporal scope
At the time Engineer B commenced the post-occupancy inspection
Source Evidence
Source text
The project was completed and occupied four years later, and Engineer A was fully paid for his services.

Text references
Approximately seven years after the original occupancy, ownership of the facility changed.
Engineer A requested the registration board to find Engineer B guilty of 'misconduct' in that Engineer B had obtained employment by a questionable method of criticizing Engineer A without his knowledge
The project was completed and occupied four years later, and Engineer A was fully paid for his services.
TTL
@prefix case169: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/169#> . @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#> . case169:Engineer_B_Post-Completion_Terminated-Relationship_Review_Without_Notification_Permissibility a proeth:Post-CompletionTerminated-RelationshipReviewWithoutIncumbentNotificationPermissibilityObligation, owl:NamedIndividual ; rdfs:label "Engineer B Post-Completion Terminated-Relationship Review Without Notification Permissibility" ; proeth-core:competesWith case169:Engineer_B_Peer_Review_Knowledge_Requirement_Purpose-Limited_Interpretation ; proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case169:Engineer_A_Original_Design_Completion_and_Payment_State, case169:Engineer_B_Review_Conducted_With_Engineer_As_Knowledge ; proeth-core:prevailsOver case169:Engineer_B_Peer_Review_Knowledge_Requirement_Purpose-Limited_Interpretation ; proeth:casecontext "Engineer A alleged Engineer B obtained employment by a questionable method of criticizing Engineer A without his knowledge; however, Engineer A had been fully paid and the project completed seven years prior, with ownership having since changed." ; proeth:compliancestatus "met" ; proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ; proeth:confidence "0.9" ; proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case169:Terminated-Connection_Peer_Review_Permissibility_Invoked_by_Engineer_B_Review_of_Engineer_A_Work ; proeth:discoveredincase "169" ; proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ; proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T22:19:17.209429+00:00" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "169" ; proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T22:19:17.209429+00:00" ; proeth:importance "high" ; proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer B" ; proeth:obligationclass "Post-Completion Terminated-Relationship Review Without Incumbent Notification Permissibility Obligation" ; proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer B was not ethically required to notify Engineer A before commencing the post-occupancy inspection, because Engineer A's contractual relationship with the project had been fully completed and terminated through full payment years prior to the review; the NSPE III.8.a notification requirement does not apply to engineers whose connection with the work has been terminated." ; proeth:sourcetext "The project was completed and occupied four years later, and Engineer A was fully paid for his services." ; proeth:temporalscope "At the time Engineer B commenced the post-occupancy inspection" ; proeth:textreferences "Approximately seven years after the original occupancy, ownership of the facility changed.", "Engineer A requested the registration board to find Engineer B guilty of 'misconduct' in that Engineer B had obtained employment by a questionable method of criticizing Engineer A without his knowledge", "The project was completed and occupied four years later, and Engineer A was fully paid for his services." ; proeth:wasattributedto "Case 169 Extraction" ; prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T22:36:17.042544"^^xsd:dateTime ; prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 169 Extraction" .
Metadata
Type
Individual
Last Updated
2026-05-28 16:27
Discovered in case
169
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-01T22:19:17.209429+00:00
First case
169
Generated
2026-03-01T22:19:17.209429+00:00
Attributed to
Case 169 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T22:36:17.042544
Generated by
ProEthica Case 169 Extraction