Engineer A Client Safety Violation Insistence or Withdrawal Obligation
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/89#Engineer_A_Client_Safety_Violation_Insistence_or_Withdrawal_Obligation
Properties
Instance of
ClientSafetyViolationInsistenceorProjectWithdrawalObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#ClientSafetyViolationInsistenceorProjectWithdrawalObligation
Case context
Engineer A determined a full-time on-site representative was necessary due to the dangerous construction phase; the client refused on cost grounds; Engineer A neither persisted in insistence nor withdrew, but instead proceeded with the project.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.93
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to insist that the client hire the full-time on-site project representative identified as necessary for the dangerous construction phase, or, if the client continued to refuse, to withdraw from the project rather than proceeding without the required safety oversight.
Temporal scope
Upon the client's refusal to hire the on-site representative
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Confirmed Construction Risk Without Adequate Safeguards
Source Evidence
Source text
Because of the potentially dangerous nature of implementing the design during the construction phase, Engineer A recommends to the client that a full-time, on-site project representative be hired for the project.
Text references
After reviewing the completed project plans and costs, the client indicates to Engineer A that the project would be too costly if such a representative were hired.
Because of the potentially dangerous nature of implementing the design during the construction phase, Engineer A recommends to the client that a full-time, on-site project representative be hired for the project.
Engineer A proceeds with his work on the project.
TTL
@prefix case89: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/89#> .
@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#> .
case89:Engineer_A_Client_Safety_Violation_Insistence_or_Withdrawal_Obligation a proeth:ClientSafetyViolationInsistenceorProjectWithdrawalObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Client Safety Violation Insistence or Withdrawal Obligation" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case89:Engineer_A_Persistent_Client_Safety_Persuasion_Before_Withdrawal ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case89:Confirmed_Construction_Risk_Without_Adequate_Safeguards ;
proeth-core:prevailsOver case89:Engineer_A_Graduated_Escalation_Before_Project_Withdrawal ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer A determined a full-time on-site representative was necessary due to the dangerous construction phase; the client refused on cost grounds; Engineer A neither persisted in insistence nor withdrew, but instead proceeded with the project." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.93" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case89:Faithful_Agent_Obligation_Within_Ethical_Limits_Invoked_to_Define_Boundary_of_Engineer_As_Client_Loyalty,
case89:Insistence_on_Client_Remedial_Action_Invoked_for_On-Site_Representative_Requirement,
case89:Project_Withdrawal_as_Ethical_Recourse_Invoked_as_Engineer_As_Required_Response ;
proeth:discoveredincase "89" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T18:10:57.098840+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "89" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T18:10:57.098840+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Client Safety Violation Insistence or Project Withdrawal Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to insist that the client hire the full-time on-site project representative identified as necessary for the dangerous construction phase, or, if the client continued to refuse, to withdraw from the project rather than proceeding without the required safety oversight." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Because of the potentially dangerous nature of implementing the design during the construction phase, Engineer A recommends to the client that a full-time, on-site project representative be hired for the project." ;
proeth:temporalscope "Upon the client's refusal to hire the on-site representative" ;
proeth:textreferences "After reviewing the completed project plans and costs, the client indicates to Engineer A that the project would be too costly if such a representative were hired.",
"Because of the potentially dangerous nature of implementing the design during the construction phase, Engineer A recommends to the client that a full-time, on-site project representative be hired for the project.",
"Engineer A proceeds with his work on the project." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 89 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T18:38:27.067913"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 89 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
89
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-01T18:10:57.098840+00:00
First case
89
Generated
2026-03-01T18:10:57.098840+00:00
Attributed to
Case 89 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T18:38:27.067913
Generated by
ProEthica Case 89 Extraction