Engineer A Client Loyalty Non-Partisan Boundary BER 85-5
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/176#Engineer_A_Client_Loyalty_Non-Partisan_Boundary_BER_85-5
Properties
Instance of
ClientLoyaltyNon-PartisanDisputeFindingBoundaryObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#ClientLoyaltyNon-PartisanDisputeFindingBoundaryObligation
Case context
After Engineer A found in the Contractor's favor, the Owner criticized Engineer A, claiming the duty of loyalty required Engineer A to have found in the Owner's favor; Engineer A's impartial finding was the ethically correct response.
Compliance status
met
Confidence
0.96
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to recognize that the duty of loyalty to the Owner did not extend to rendering a partisan, owner-favoring finding in the concrete pour dispute, and that finding in favor of the Contractor on the technical and contractual merits constituted fulfillment — not breach — of the loyalty obligation.
Temporal scope
At the time of rendering the dispute finding and in response to the Owner's subsequent criticism
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Engineer A Competing Duties — Loyalty vs. Impartiality
Source Evidence
Source text
Owner accepts Engineer A's interpretation, but also criticizes Engineer A, claiming that because of Engineer A's ethical duty of loyalty to the Owner, Engineer A should have found in Owner's favor.
Text references
Following his review, Engineer A agrees with the Contractor's position, noting that the Owner had approved certain changes in the work and that the Contractor complied with those changes.
Owner accepts Engineer A's interpretation, but also criticizes Engineer A, claiming that because of Engineer A's ethical duty of loyalty to the Owner, Engineer A should have found in Owner's favor.
TTL
@prefix case176: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/176#> .
@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#> .
case176:Engineer_A_Client_Loyalty_Non-Partisan_Boundary_BER_85-5 a proeth:ClientLoyaltyNon-PartisanDisputeFindingBoundaryObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Client Loyalty Non-Partisan Boundary BER 85-5" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case176:Engineer_A_Contractually_Designated_Dispute_Resolver_Impartiality_Performance ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/176#Engineer_A_Competing_Duties_—_Loyalty_vs._Impartiality> ;
proeth:casecontext "After Engineer A found in the Contractor's favor, the Owner criticized Engineer A, claiming the duty of loyalty required Engineer A to have found in the Owner's favor; Engineer A's impartial finding was the ethically correct response." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "met" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.96" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case176:Loyalty_Fulfilled_Through_Impartial_Role_Performance_by_Engineer_A,
case176:Loyalty_Fulfillment_Through_Impartial_Performance_By_Engineer_A ;
proeth:discoveredincase "176" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T11:01:01.705953+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "176" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T11:01:01.705953+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Client Loyalty Non-Partisan Dispute Finding Boundary Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to recognize that the duty of loyalty to the Owner did not extend to rendering a partisan, owner-favoring finding in the concrete pour dispute, and that finding in favor of the Contractor on the technical and contractual merits constituted fulfillment — not breach — of the loyalty obligation." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Owner accepts Engineer A's interpretation, but also criticizes Engineer A, claiming that because of Engineer A's ethical duty of loyalty to the Owner, Engineer A should have found in Owner's favor." ;
proeth:temporalscope "At the time of rendering the dispute finding and in response to the Owner's subsequent criticism" ;
proeth:textreferences "Following his review, Engineer A agrees with the Contractor's position, noting that the Owner had approved certain changes in the work and that the Contractor complied with those changes.",
"Owner accepts Engineer A's interpretation, but also criticizes Engineer A, claiming that because of Engineer A's ethical duty of loyalty to the Owner, Engineer A should have found in Owner's favor." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 176 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T11:13:16.197320"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 176 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
176
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-01T11:01:01.705953+00:00
First case
176
Generated
2026-03-01T11:01:01.705953+00:00
Attributed to
Case 176 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T11:13:16.197320
Generated by
ProEthica Case 176 Extraction