Faithful Agent Notification Obligation Invoked for Project Success Risk Communication
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/89#Faithful_Agent_Notification_Obligation_Invoked_for_Project_Success_Risk_Communication
Properties
Instance of
FaithfulAgentNotificationObligationforProjectSuccessRisk
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#FaithfulAgentNotificationObligationforProjectSuccessRisk
Applied to
Engineer A's initial notification to client about on-site representative need
Balancing with
Public Welfare Paramount
Concrete expression
Engineer A fulfilled the faithful agent notification obligation by informing the client that a full-time on-site project representative would be necessary for the dangerous construction project — this notification was compliant with Section III.1.b. requiring engineers to inform clients when a project will not be successful
Confidence
0.91
Importance
high
Interpretation
The faithful agent notification obligation was satisfied by Engineer A's initial communication — the ethical violation arose not from failure to notify but from subsequent passive acquiescence after the client rejected the recommendation
Invoked by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Tension resolution
Notification was compliant but insufficient — the faithful agent obligation to notify was met, but the public safety obligation required further insistence beyond mere notification
Source Evidence
Source text
It is clear from the facts that Engineer A did notify the client of the need to hire a full-time, on-site project representative for the construction phase of the project. Therefore, Engineer A did act in accordance with Section III.1.b.
Text references
It is clear from the facts that Engineer A did notify the client of the need to hire a full-time, on-site project representative for the construction phase of the project
Section III.1.b. clearly requires the engineer to inform a client when the engineer believes that a project will not be successful
Therefore, Engineer A did act in accordance with Section III.1.b.
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 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:Faithful_Agent_Notification_Obligation_Invoked_for_Project_Success_Risk_Communication a proeth:FaithfulAgentNotificationObligationforProjectSuccessRisk,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Faithful Agent Notification Obligation Invoked for Project Success Risk Communication" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's initial notification to client about on-site representative need" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Public Welfare Paramount" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer A fulfilled the faithful agent notification obligation by informing the client that a full-time on-site project representative would be necessary for the dangerous construction project — this notification was compliant with Section III.1.b. requiring engineers to inform clients when a project will not be successful" ;
proeth:confidence "0.91" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "89" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T18:14:32.608873+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "89" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T18:14:32.608873+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The faithful agent notification obligation was satisfied by Engineer A's initial communication — the ethical violation arose not from failure to notify but from subsequent passive acquiescence after the client rejected the recommendation" ;
proeth:invokedby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:principleclass "Faithful Agent Notification Obligation for Project Success Risk" ;
proeth:sourcetext "It is clear from the facts that Engineer A did notify the client of the need to hire a full-time, on-site project representative for the construction phase of the project. Therefore, Engineer A did act in accordance with Section III.1.b." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "Notification was compliant but insufficient — the faithful agent obligation to notify was met, but the public safety obligation required further insistence beyond mere notification" ;
proeth:textreferences "It is clear from the facts that Engineer A did notify the client of the need to hire a full-time, on-site project representative for the construction phase of the project",
"Section III.1.b. clearly requires the engineer to inform a client when the engineer believes that a project will not be successful",
"Therefore, Engineer A did act in accordance with Section III.1.b." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 89 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T18:38:27.071783"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 89 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
89
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T18:14:32.608873+00:00
First case
89
Generated
2026-03-01T18:14:32.608873+00:00
Attributed to
Case 89 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T18:38:27.071783
Generated by
ProEthica Case 89 Extraction