Objectivity Obligation Engineer A Waterfront Development Presentation
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/94#Objectivity_Obligation_Engineer_A_Waterfront_Development_Presentation
Properties
Instance of
Applied to
Professional judgment determination of relevance and pertinence of traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts
Balancing with
Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits
Relevance and Pertinence Standard for Voluntary Disclosure at Public Hearings
Concrete expression
Engineer A's professional judgment about whether traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts were 'relevant and pertinent' was required to be based on objective technical assessment rather than on Developer F's commercial interests or Engineer A's self-interest in maintaining the client relationship.
Confidence
0.84
Importance
medium
Interpretation
The objectivity principle constrains the exercise of professional judgment under the relevance and pertinence standard: Engineer A's judgment about what to disclose must be genuinely objective, not a rationalization for suppressing information unfavorable to the client.
Invoked by
Engineer A Public Hearing Presenting Consulting Engineer Present Case
Tension resolution
The Board's holding that Engineer A's professional judgment was the operative standard implicitly required that judgment to be objective; a judgment motivated by client interest rather than technical assessment would not satisfy the ethical standard.
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer A's ethical obligation does not require him to disclose such information if, in his professional judgment, it is not 'relevant and pertinent.'
Text references
Engineer A's ethical obligation does not require him to disclose such information if, in his professional judgment, it is not 'relevant and pertinent.'
Engineers can ethically reach different conclusions when looking at the same set of facts.
TTL
@prefix case94: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/94#> .
@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#> .
case94:Objectivity_Obligation_Engineer_A_Waterfront_Development_Presentation a proeth:Objectivity,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Objectivity Obligation Engineer A Waterfront Development Presentation" ;
proeth:appliedto "Professional judgment determination of relevance and pertinence of traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits",
"Relevance and Pertinence Standard for Voluntary Disclosure at Public Hearings" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer A's professional judgment about whether traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts were 'relevant and pertinent' was required to be based on objective technical assessment rather than on Developer F's commercial interests or Engineer A's self-interest in maintaining the client relationship." ;
proeth:confidence "0.84" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "94" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-28T19:01:33.144715+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "94" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-28T19:01:33.144715+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "medium" ;
proeth:interpretation "The objectivity principle constrains the exercise of professional judgment under the relevance and pertinence standard: Engineer A's judgment about what to disclose must be genuinely objective, not a rationalization for suppressing information unfavorable to the client." ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer A Public Hearing Presenting Consulting Engineer Present Case" ;
proeth:principleclass "Objectivity" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer A's ethical obligation does not require him to disclose such information if, in his professional judgment, it is not 'relevant and pertinent.'" ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The Board's holding that Engineer A's professional judgment was the operative standard implicitly required that judgment to be objective; a judgment motivated by client interest rather than technical assessment would not satisfy the ethical standard." ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A's ethical obligation does not require him to disclose such information if, in his professional judgment, it is not 'relevant and pertinent.'",
"Engineers can ethically reach different conclusions when looking at the same set of facts." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 94 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T19:13:05.767283"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 94 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
94
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-28T19:01:33.144715+00:00
First case
94
Generated
2026-02-28T19:01:33.144715+00:00
Attributed to
Case 94 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-28T19:13:05.767283
Generated by
ProEthica Case 94 Extraction