Firm A Developer Client Conflict Proactive Disclosure to City
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/177#Firm_A_Developer_Client_Conflict_Proactive_Disclosure_to_City
Properties
Instance of
City-RetainedEngineerDeveloperClientConflictProactiveDisclosuretoMunicipalClientObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#City-RetainedEngineerDeveloperClientConflictProactiveDisclosuretoMunicipalClientObligation
Case context
Firm A simultaneously held private design and inspection relationships with developers whose work it was inspecting on behalf of the city, creating a structural conflict requiring full disclosure to the municipal client.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.88
Importance
high
Obligated party
Firm A
Obligation statement
Firm A was obligated to proactively and affirmatively disclose to the city the full nature and extent of its private consulting relationships with developers whose projects Firm A was simultaneously inspecting on the city's behalf, including the specific developers involved, the nature of private services provided, and Firm A's assessment of whether the conflict was manageable.
Temporal scope
Before and throughout all concurrent city inspection and private developer engagements
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Firm A Multi-Role Structural Conflict — Design Review and Inspection for Same Parties
derivedFromPrinciple
Disclosure Insufficiency for Structural Conflict Affirmed in Firm A
Source Evidence
Source text
We cannot see how Firm A can adequately represent the separate and sometimes differing interests of its clients under the facts presented.
Text references
The Board reaffirms the view that the circumstances described are in violation of Section II.4.d.
We cannot see how Firm A can adequately represent the separate and sometimes differing interests of its clients under the facts presented.
TTL
@prefix case177: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/177#> .
@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#> .
case177:Firm_A_Developer_Client_Conflict_Proactive_Disclosure_to_City a proeth:City-RetainedEngineerDeveloperClientConflictProactiveDisclosuretoMunicipalClientObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Firm A Developer Client Conflict Proactive Disclosure to City" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case177:Firm_A_City-Retained_Engineer_Multi-Role_Conflict_Non-Engagement ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/177#Firm_A_Multi-Role_Structural_Conflict_—_Design_Review_and_Inspection_for_Same_Parties> ;
proeth:casecontext "Firm A simultaneously held private design and inspection relationships with developers whose work it was inspecting on behalf of the city, creating a structural conflict requiring full disclosure to the municipal client." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.88" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case177:Disclosure_Insufficiency_for_Structural_Conflict_Affirmed_in_Firm_A ;
proeth:discoveredincase "177" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T09:23:17.458159+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "177" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T09:23:17.458159+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Firm A" ;
proeth:obligationclass "City-Retained Engineer Developer Client Conflict Proactive Disclosure to Municipal Client Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Firm A was obligated to proactively and affirmatively disclose to the city the full nature and extent of its private consulting relationships with developers whose projects Firm A was simultaneously inspecting on the city's behalf, including the specific developers involved, the nature of private services provided, and Firm A's assessment of whether the conflict was manageable." ;
proeth:sourcetext "We cannot see how Firm A can adequately represent the separate and sometimes differing interests of its clients under the facts presented." ;
proeth:temporalscope "Before and throughout all concurrent city inspection and private developer engagements" ;
proeth:textreferences "The Board reaffirms the view that the circumstances described are in violation of Section II.4.d.",
"We cannot see how Firm A can adequately represent the separate and sometimes differing interests of its clients under the facts presented." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 177 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T09:35:05.763971"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 177 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
177
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T09:23:17.458159+00:00
First case
177
Generated
2026-03-01T09:23:17.458159+00:00
Attributed to
Case 177 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T09:35:05.763971
Generated by
ProEthica Case 177 Extraction