Non-Disclosing Client-Solicited Departure Permissibility Applied to Engineer A

@prefix case178: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/178#> . @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#> . case178:Non-Disclosing_Client-Solicited_Departure_Permissibility_Applied_to_Engineer_A a proeth:Non-DisclosingClient-SolicitedDepartureContextualPermissibilityPrinciple, owl:NamedIndividual ; rdfs:label "Non-Disclosing Client-Solicited Departure Permissibility Applied to Engineer A" ; proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's failure to disclose Clover City's interest to ABC before departing" ; proeth:balancingwith "Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits", "Loyalty", "Prudential Disclosure as Relational Self-Protection" ; proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ; proeth:concreteexpression "Unlike Case 86-5 where Engineers X, Y, Z disclosed client interest to their employer before departing, Engineer A made no such disclosure to ABC — yet the Board found this non-disclosure not ethically significant because Engineer A's departure was independently motivated and no formal pre-departure agreement with Clover City existed" ; proeth:confidence "0.9" ; proeth:discoveredincase "178" ; proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ; proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T08:35:45.392536+00:00" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "178" ; proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T08:35:45.392536+00:00" ; proeth:importance "high" ; proeth:interpretation "Non-disclosure of client interest is not automatically an ethical violation when the departure is independently motivated and no formal pre-departure client agreement exists — the holistic assessment of motivations and conduct governs" ; proeth:invokedby "Engineer A Non-Disclosing Client-Solicited Departing Staff Engineer" ; proeth:principleclass "Non-Disclosing Client-Solicited Departure Contextual Permissibility Principle" ; proeth:sourcetext "However, weighing all factors, the Board does not consider this to be particularly significant because (1) the engineers in Case No. 86-5 provided disclosure and did not seek consent or concurrence and (2) in the present case Engineer A's decision to depart from ABC and establish his own firm clearly appears to be motivated by factors independent from any relationship that Engineer A might be developing with Clover City." ; proeth:tensionresolution "The Board found non-disclosure not ethically significant because: (1) disclosure in Case 86-5 did not require consent; and (2) Engineer A's departure was independently motivated, not driven by a pre-arranged client relationship" ; proeth:textreferences "However, weighing all factors, the Board does not consider this to be particularly significant because (1) the engineers in Case No. 86-5 provided disclosure and did not seek consent or concurrence and (2) in the present case Engineer A's decision to depart from ABC and establish his own firm clearly appears to be motivated by factors independent from any relationship that Engineer A might be developing with Clover City.", "While Clover City may have expressed preliminary interest in Engineer A's future services, there was no formal agreement between Engineer A and the city and no guarantee that with the passage of the year, Engineer A's solicitations for work would be positively received by Clover City.", "in the present case, there is no disclosure between Engineer A and ABC." ; proeth:wasattributedto "Case 178 Extraction" ; prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T08:48:26.020623"^^xsd:dateTime ; prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 178 Extraction" .