Brochure Personnel Currency Disclosure Obligation Violated by Engineer B
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/171#Brochure_Personnel_Currency_Disclosure_Obligation_Violated_by_Engineer_B
Properties
Instance of
BrochurePersonnelCurrencyDisclosureDuringActiveNegotiationObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#BrochurePersonnelCurrencyDisclosureDuringActiveNegotiationObligation
Applied to
Engineer B's Clients Prospective Engineering Services Client Relying on Firm Brochure
Engineer B's Current Clients Prospective Brochure-Relying
Balancing with
Notice-Period Brochure Distribution Conditional Permissibility Principle
Pertinent Fact Misrepresentation Intent-and-Purpose Dual-Element Test
Concrete expression
Engineer B, having issued a termination notice to Engineer A in November 1982, bore an obligation to apprise prospective clients of Engineer A's changed employment status whenever distributing the brochure listing Engineer A as a key employee during active negotiations; Engineer B's failure to provide this corrective disclosure during the notice period constitutes misrepresentation of a pertinent fact.
Confidence
0.92
Importance
high
Interpretation
The pertinence of Engineer A's listing to client selection decisions triggers the disclosure obligation; clients relying on the brochure to assess firm capabilities are materially misled if they are not informed that the listed key employee is departing.
Invoked by
Engineer B Brochure-Misrepresenting Terminating Employer Engineer
Tension resolution
The disclosure obligation is not discharged by the practical difficulty of reprinting; a corrective cover letter or errata sheet during active negotiations would have satisfied the obligation.
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees, and continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it well after Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A.
Text references
Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice.
Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees.
TTL
@prefix case171: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/171#> .
@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#> .
case171:Brochure_Personnel_Currency_Disclosure_Obligation_Violated_by_Engineer_B a proeth:BrochurePersonnelCurrencyDisclosureDuringActiveNegotiationObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Brochure Personnel Currency Disclosure Obligation Violated by Engineer B" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer B's Clients Prospective Engineering Services Client Relying on Firm Brochure",
"Engineer B's Current Clients Prospective Brochure-Relying" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Notice-Period Brochure Distribution Conditional Permissibility Principle",
"Pertinent Fact Misrepresentation Intent-and-Purpose Dual-Element Test" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer B, having issued a termination notice to Engineer A in November 1982, bore an obligation to apprise prospective clients of Engineer A's changed employment status whenever distributing the brochure listing Engineer A as a key employee during active negotiations; Engineer B's failure to provide this corrective disclosure during the notice period constitutes misrepresentation of a pertinent fact." ;
proeth:confidence "0.92" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "171" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-02T14:28:39.943101+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "171" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-02T14:28:39.943101+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The pertinence of Engineer A's listing to client selection decisions triggers the disclosure obligation; clients relying on the brochure to assess firm capabilities are materially misled if they are not informed that the listed key employee is departing." ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer B Brochure-Misrepresenting Terminating Employer Engineer" ;
proeth:principleclass "Brochure Personnel Currency Disclosure During Active Negotiation Obligation" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees, and continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it well after Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The disclosure obligation is not discharged by the practical difficulty of reprinting; a corrective cover letter or errata sheet during active negotiations would have satisfied the obligation." ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice.",
"Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 171 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-02T14:51:15.272806"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 171 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
171
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-02T14:28:39.943101+00:00
First case
171
Generated
2026-03-02T14:28:39.943101+00:00
Attributed to
Case 171 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-02T14:51:15.272806
Generated by
ProEthica Case 171 Extraction