Engineer A Faithful Agent Trustee Loyalty Non-Fiduciary Interpretation BER 85-5
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/176#Engineer_A_Faithful_Agent_Trustee_Loyalty_Non-Fiduciary_Interpretation_BER_85-5
Properties
Instance of
FaithfulAgentTrusteeGeneralLoyaltyNon-FiduciaryInterpretationComplianceObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#FaithfulAgentTrusteeGeneralLoyaltyNon-FiduciaryInterpretationComplianceObligation
Case context
The Owner invoked the loyalty principle to argue Engineer A should have found in the Owner's favor; the correct interpretation of the faithful agent duty required impartial performance of the contractually designated role, not partisan advocacy.
Compliance status
met
Confidence
0.93
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to interpret the faithful agent and trustee duty under NSPE II.4 as imposing a general duty of loyalty and fair dealing toward the Owner — carrying out the dispute resolution in the manner most beneficial to the Owner's genuine interests — rather than as a strict obligation to advocate for the Owner's preferred outcome in a contractually designated impartial role.
Temporal scope
Throughout the dispute resolution and in response to the Owner's post-finding criticism
Relationships
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
Engineer A, seeks to remain impartial in the dispute, citing a provision in his contract with the Owner stating that the engineer is the initial interpreter of the requirements of the contract documents and judge of the acceptability of the work.
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_Faithful_Agent_Trustee_Loyalty_Non-Fiduciary_Interpretation_BER_85-5 a proeth:FaithfulAgentTrusteeGeneralLoyaltyNon-FiduciaryInterpretationComplianceObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Faithful Agent Trustee Loyalty Non-Fiduciary Interpretation 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_Contractual_Impartiality_Obligation_—_Owner-Contractor_Concrete_Pour_Dispute> ;
proeth:casecontext "The Owner invoked the loyalty principle to argue Engineer A should have found in the Owner's favor; the correct interpretation of the faithful agent duty required impartial performance of the contractually designated role, not partisan advocacy." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "met" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.93" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case176:Faithful_Agent_Duty_Correctly_Executed_By_Engineer_A_As_Impartial_Arbiter,
case176:Faithful_Agent_Obligation_Bounded_by_Impartial_Role_Designation ;
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 "Faithful Agent Trustee General Loyalty Non-Fiduciary Interpretation Compliance Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to interpret the faithful agent and trustee duty under NSPE II.4 as imposing a general duty of loyalty and fair dealing toward the Owner — carrying out the dispute resolution in the manner most beneficial to the Owner's genuine interests — rather than as a strict obligation to advocate for the Owner's preferred outcome in a contractually designated impartial role." ;
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 "Throughout the dispute resolution and in response to the Owner's post-finding criticism" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A, seeks to remain impartial in the dispute, citing a provision in his contract with the Owner stating that the engineer is the initial interpreter of the requirements of the contract documents and judge of the acceptability of the work.",
"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 "2026-03-01T11:13:16.197464"^^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
2026-03-01T11:13:16.197464
Generated by
ProEthica Case 176 Extraction