Engineer A Conditional Project Withdrawal Client B Refusal Tidal Crossing
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/88#Engineer_A_Conditional_Project_Withdrawal_Client_B_Refusal_Tidal_Crossing
Properties
Instance of
ConditionalProjectWithdrawalAfterClientRefusalofSafetyDisclosureObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#ConditionalProjectWithdrawalAfterClientRefusalofSafetyDisclosureObligation
Case context
Client B directed Engineer A to forgo the recommended specialized hydraulic analysis; Engineer A's graduated escalation steps — client discussion and written report proposal — were the prerequisite conditions for withdrawal.
Compliance status
unclear
Confidence
0.89
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to withdraw from the tidal crossing project if Client B refused both the opportunity to conduct the recommended specialized hydraulic analysis and the opportunity to document the identified flood risk concern in an engineering report for regulatory consideration.
Temporal scope
Upon Client B's refusal of both graduated escalation options
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Client B Refusal of Climate Evaluation and Disclosure
Source Evidence
Source text
Failing agreement by Client B to either of these courses of action the BER believes that Engineer A should withdraw from the project.
Text references
Failing agreement by Client B to either of these courses of action the BER believes that Engineer A should withdraw from the project.
In BER Case 18-9, Engineer A worked for a developer to perform hydrodynamic modeling and coastal risk assessment regarding a proposed residential development... The BER concluded that Engineer A should continue to attempt to convince the owner of the potential for damage to future residents and the public, and, failing agreement on Engineer A's proposed design standard, Engineer A should withdraw from the project.
TTL
@prefix case88: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/88#> .
@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#> .
case88:Engineer_A_Conditional_Project_Withdrawal_Client_B_Refusal_Tidal_Crossing a proeth:ConditionalProjectWithdrawalAfterClientRefusalofSafetyDisclosureObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Conditional Project Withdrawal Client B Refusal Tidal Crossing" ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case88:Client_B_Refusal_of_Climate_Evaluation_and_Disclosure ;
proeth:casecontext "Client B directed Engineer A to forgo the recommended specialized hydraulic analysis; Engineer A's graduated escalation steps — client discussion and written report proposal — were the prerequisite conditions for withdrawal." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unclear" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.89" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case88:Post-Client-Refusal_Escalation_Assessment_Obligation_Invoked_by_BER_Discussion_Section ;
proeth:discoveredincase "88" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-26T00:21:20.043237+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "88" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-26T00:21:20.043237+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Conditional Project Withdrawal After Client Refusal of Safety Disclosure Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to withdraw from the tidal crossing project if Client B refused both the opportunity to conduct the recommended specialized hydraulic analysis and the opportunity to document the identified flood risk concern in an engineering report for regulatory consideration." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Failing agreement by Client B to either of these courses of action the BER believes that Engineer A should withdraw from the project." ;
proeth:temporalscope "Upon Client B's refusal of both graduated escalation options" ;
proeth:textreferences "Failing agreement by Client B to either of these courses of action the BER believes that Engineer A should withdraw from the project.",
"In BER Case 18-9, Engineer A worked for a developer to perform hydrodynamic modeling and coastal risk assessment regarding a proposed residential development... The BER concluded that Engineer A should continue to attempt to convince the owner of the potential for damage to future residents and the public, and, failing agreement on Engineer A's proposed design standard, Engineer A should withdraw from the project." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 88 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-26T00:31:11.072306"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 88 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
88
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-26T00:21:20.043237+00:00
First case
88
Generated
2026-02-26T00:21:20.043237+00:00
Attributed to
Case 88 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-26T00:31:11.072306
Generated by
ProEthica Case 88 Extraction