Engineers A B Client Override Refusal
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/76#Engineers_A_B_Client_Override_Refusal
Definition
When the MWC overruled the joint engineering recommendations regarding water treatment requirements, Engineers A and B were required to refuse to allow the project to proceed without escalating to appropriate authorities.
Properties
Instance of
ClientOverrideRefusalPrinciple
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#ClientOverrideRefusalPrinciple
Applied to
Metropolitan Water Commission Client Override
Balancing with
Faithful Agent Duty Principle
Concrete expression
When the MWC overruled the joint engineering recommendations regarding water treatment requirements, Engineers A and B were required to refuse to allow the project to proceed without escalating to appropriate authorities.
Confidence
0.95
Interpretation
The MWC's decision to proceed without the recommended water treatment measures constitutes a client override of safety-necessary engineering judgment, triggering the obligation to escalate rather than acquiesce.
Tension resolution
The client override refusal obligation is triggered by the identification of public health risk; loyalty to the MWC does not extend to acquiescing in a decision that endangers public water consumers.
Match Confidence
0.95
Match Reasoning
Individual typed as existing ontology class 'Client Override Refusal Principle'
Matched Ontology Label
Client Override Refusal Principle
Matches Existing
true
Synthesis Literal
appliedTo
balancingWith
concreteExpression
confidence
interpretation
principleClass
tensionResolution
textReferences
Relationships
invokedBy
Agent Engineer A, Agent Engineer B
Source Evidence
Text references
The engineering judgments of Engineer A and Engineer B were overruled by the MWC. If Engineers A and B believe life or property is endangered, Section II.1.a. provides that not only shall the employer or client be notified, but also all other appropriate authorities.
Source text
The engineering judgments of Engineer A and Engineer B were overruled by the MWC.
TTL
@prefix case76: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/76#> .
@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 proeth-prov: <http://proethica.org/provenance#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case76:Engineers_A_B_Client_Override_Refusal a proeth:ClientOverrideRefusalPrinciple,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineers A B Client Override Refusal" ;
proeth-core:invokedBy case76:Agent_Engineer_A,
case76:Agent_Engineer_B ;
proeth:appliedTo "Metropolitan Water Commission Client Override" ;
proeth:balancingWith "Faithful Agent Duty Principle" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteExpression "When the MWC overruled the joint engineering recommendations regarding water treatment requirements, Engineers A and B were required to refuse to allow the project to proceed without escalating to appropriate authorities." ;
proeth:confidence "0.95" ;
proeth:interpretation "The MWC's decision to proceed without the recommended water treatment measures constitutes a client override of safety-necessary engineering judgment, triggering the obligation to escalate rather than acquiesce." ;
proeth:invokedBy "Engineer A Safety Reporting",
"Engineer B Safety Reporting" ;
proeth:principleClass "Client Override Refusal Principle" ;
proeth:tensionResolution "The client override refusal obligation is triggered by the identification of public health risk; loyalty to the MWC does not extend to acquiescing in a decision that endangers public water consumers." ;
proeth:textReferences "The engineering judgments of Engineer A and Engineer B were overruled by the MWC. If Engineers A and B believe life or property is endangered, Section II.1.a. provides that not only shall the employer or client be notified, but also all other appropriate authorities." ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInCase 76 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInPass 2 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInSection "discussion" ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredAt "2026-06-05T11:26:55.962095+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredInCase 76 ;
proeth-prov:matchConfidence 0.95 ;
proeth-prov:matchReasoning "Individual typed as existing ontology class 'Client Override Refusal Principle'" ;
proeth-prov:matchedOntologyClass proeth:ClientOverrideRefusalPrinciple ;
proeth-prov:matchedOntologyLabel "Client Override Refusal Principle" ;
proeth-prov:matchesExisting true ;
proeth-prov:sourceText "The engineering judgments of Engineer A and Engineer B were overruled by the MWC." ;
proeth-prov:synthesisLiteral "appliedTo",
"balancingWith",
"concreteExpression",
"confidence",
"interpretation",
"principleClass",
"tensionResolution",
"textReferences" ;
rdfs:comment "When the MWC overruled the joint engineering recommendations regarding water treatment requirements, Engineers A and B were required to refuse to allow the project to proceed without escalating to appropriate authorities." ;
skos:definition "When the MWC overruled the joint engineering recommendations regarding water treatment requirements, Engineers A and B were required to refuse to allow the project to proceed without escalating to appropriate authorities." ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-06-05T11:26:55.962095+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "Case 76 Extraction",
"claude-sonnet-4-6" ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 76 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
76
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-06-05T11:26:55.962095+00:00
First case
76
Generated
2026-06-05T11:26:55.962095+00:00
Attributed to
['Case 76 Extraction', 'claude-sonnet-4-6']
Generated by
ProEthica Case 76 Extraction