Faithful Agent Duty Principle
Class
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#FaithfulAgentDutyPrinciple
Class Hierarchy
- Thing
- ↳ entity (bfo)
- ↳ continuant (bfo)
- ↳ generically dependent continuant (bfo)
- ↳ information content entity (iao)
- ↳ directive information entity (iao)
- ↳ Principle (proethica-core)
- ↳ Relational Principle (proethica-intermediate)
- ↳ FaithfulAgentDutyPrinciple
Definition
Relational principle establishing that an engineer owes a duty of loyalty to each client or employer, acting as a faithful agent or trustee in advancing the client's legitimate interests. This duty is a genuine professional obligation but is subordinate to the engineer's paramount duty to public welfare and does not authorize compliance with client instructions that suppress safety-relevant findings or create unmitigated public risk.
Case Provenance
Discovered in
- Case 8: Balancing Client Directives and Public Welfare: Stormwater Management Dilemma first
- Case 76: Public Health, Safety, and Welfare—Drinking Water Quality
This class was discovered during extraction of the case(s) above; the supporting verbatim quotes are in Source Evidence.
Properties
Abstract Nature
The scope of faithful agency is context-dependent and requires interpretation of what constitutes a legitimate client interest versus an instruction that crosses ethical limits. The principle gains meaning through cases that define its outer boundaries.
Confidence
0.93
Derived Obligations
Follow client instructions when no ethical obligation compels otherwise
Refuse client instructions that require suppression of safety-relevant findings
Respect client requests to suspend work in the absence of known safety facts
Extensional Examples
BER Case 76-4: Engineer Doe's duty as faithful agent to XYZ Corporation did not extend to suppressing findings about water quality degradation
BER Case 84-5: Engineer A's duty to client did not justify continuing a project after refusing safety measures
Present case: Engineer L's duty to Client X did not require continuing work without protective stormwater measures
Operationalization
Requires engineers to follow client directions within ethical limits, respect client requests to pause or redirect work when no safety facts compel otherwise, and treat client information with appropriate discretion, while refusing instructions that require suppression of safety findings or creation of unmitigated public risk.
Potential Conflicts
Client Override Refusal Principle
Proactive Risk Disclosure Principle
Public Welfare Paramountcy Principle
Principle Category
relational
Value Basis
Professional relationships require trust and loyalty to function, and clients must be able to rely on engineers to advance their interests competently and honestly. However, this relational trust cannot be weaponized against the public.
Property Structure
1 · Object and Data Properties
rdfs:domain on this class or ancestor
| Property | Range | Description |
|---|---|---|
| establishedBy inherited | CodeProvision | Indicates which code provision establishes this ethical concept. |
| invokedBy inherited | Agent | Relates a Principle to the Agent(s) that invoke it in the case scenario (the parties who appeal to the principle to justify or evaluate conduct). May name several agents. |
2 · Definitional Attributes
SHACL definitional shape
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| principle kind | principleCategory | The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal. |
| extensional cases | extensionalCases | Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field. |
3 · Bearer Attributes
SHACL property shape
individual data
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| interpretation | interpretation | Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| concrete expression | concreteExpression | How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| applied to | appliedTo | What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on). |
| balancing with | balancingWith | The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field. |
| tension resolution | tensionResolution | How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| invoked by | invokedBy | The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent. |
4 · Referenced By
rdfs:range on this class or ancestor
| From | Property | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Action | guidedByPrinciple inherited | Relates an action to a principle that directs it. The principle supplies the value the action is taken to serve. |
| Code Provision | establishes inherited | Relates a code provision to the ethical concepts (principles, obligations, constraints) it establishes or defines. |
| Obligation | derivedFromPrinciple inherited | Relates an obligation to the principle or principles it operationalizes. The obligation gives concrete directive force to the more abstract value the principle expresses (Dennis et al. 2016). |
| Role | adheresToPrinciple inherited | Relates a role to principles that guide its conduct; the role-relative applicability edge of the R->P->O chain (the role determines which principles apply to conduct in that standing). |
Source Evidence
Text references
Canon I.4, Engineer L has an affirmative obligation to act as the client's faithful agent or trustee.
The BER noted an engineer's obligation is to act for each client or employer as a faithful agent or trustee.
When asked in good faith to stop the design work, in the absence of facts to the contrary, there is no reason for Engineer L not to respect the client's request.
Within this environmental framework, the present case illustrates a conflict between Fundamental Canon I.1, the engineer's obligation to hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public; and Canon I.4, the engineer's obligation to act for each employer or client as a faithful agent or trustee.
Source text
The BER noted an engineer's obligation is to act for each client or employer as a faithful agent or trustee.
Used in cases 4
@prefix core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix pcsh: <http://proethica.org/shapes/core#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@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 sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
proeth:FaithfulAgentDutyPrinciple a owl:Class ;
rdfs:label "Faithful Agent Duty Principle" ;
proeth:abstractNature "The scope of faithful agency is context-dependent and requires interpretation of what constitutes a legitimate client interest versus an instruction that crosses ethical limits. The principle gains meaning through cases that define its outer boundaries." ;
proeth:confidence "0.93" ;
proeth:derivedObligations "Follow client instructions when no ethical obligation compels otherwise",
"Refuse client instructions that require suppression of safety-relevant findings",
"Respect client requests to suspend work in the absence of known safety facts" ;
proeth:extensionalExamples "BER Case 76-4: Engineer Doe's duty as faithful agent to XYZ Corporation did not extend to suppressing findings about water quality degradation",
"BER Case 84-5: Engineer A's duty to client did not justify continuing a project after refusing safety measures",
"Present case: Engineer L's duty to Client X did not require continuing work without protective stormwater measures" ;
proeth:operationalization "Requires engineers to follow client directions within ethical limits, respect client requests to pause or redirect work when no safety facts compel otherwise, and treat client information with appropriate discretion, while refusing instructions that require suppression of safety findings or creation of unmitigated public risk." ;
proeth:potentialConflicts "Client Override Refusal Principle",
"Proactive Risk Disclosure Principle",
"Public Welfare Paramountcy Principle" ;
proeth:principleCategory "relational" ;
proeth:textReferences "Canon I.4, Engineer L has an affirmative obligation to act as the client's faithful agent or trustee.",
"The BER noted an engineer's obligation is to act for each client or employer as a faithful agent or trustee.",
"When asked in good faith to stop the design work, in the absence of facts to the contrary, there is no reason for Engineer L not to respect the client's request.",
"Within this environmental framework, the present case illustrates a conflict between Fundamental Canon I.1, the engineer's obligation to hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public; and Canon I.4, the engineer's obligation to act for each employer or client as a faithful agent or trustee." ;
proeth:valueBasis "Professional relationships require trust and loyalty to function, and clients must be able to rely on engineers to advance their interests competently and honestly. However, this relational trust cannot be weaponized against the public." ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInCase 8,
76 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInPass 2 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInSection "discussion" ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredAt "2026-06-04T10:05:37.970804+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredInCase 8 ;
proeth-prov:matchConfidence 0.82 ;
proeth-prov:matchReasoning "The faithful agent or trustee duty is a specific engineering-context expression of the Loyalty principle in the ontology. The existing Loyalty class covers the general concept of professional loyalty to clients and employers. The present principle adds the engineering-specific framing of Canon I.4 and the explicit subordination to public welfare, making it a variant rather than an exact match." ;
proeth-prov:matchedOntologyClass <http://proethica.org/ontology/principles#Loyalty> ;
proeth-prov:matchedOntologyLabel "Loyalty" ;
proeth-prov:matchesExisting true ;
proeth-prov:sourceText "The BER noted an engineer's obligation is to act for each client or employer as a faithful agent or trustee." ;
rdfs:comment "Relational principle establishing that an engineer owes a duty of loyalty to each client or employer, acting as a faithful agent or trustee in advancing the client's legitimate interests. This duty is a genuine professional obligation but is subordinate to the engineer's paramount duty to public welfare and does not authorize compliance with client instructions that suppress safety-relevant findings or create unmitigated public risk." ;
rdfs:subClassOf proeth:RelationalPrinciple ;
skos:definition "Relational principle establishing that an engineer owes a duty of loyalty to each client or employer, acting as a faithful agent or trustee in advancing the client's legitimate interests. This duty is a genuine professional obligation but is subordinate to the engineer's paramount duty to public welfare and does not authorize compliance with client instructions that suppress safety-relevant findings or create unmitigated public risk." ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-06-04T10:05:37.970804+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "Case 8 Extraction",
"claude-sonnet-4-6" .
pcsh:CaseAnnotationShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Shared per-case annotation schema (all nine components)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "The cross-component annotation fields on committed case individuals: proeth:confidence (extraction confidence, decimal; all components except Action, whose Step-3 contract carries no confidence field), proeth:textReferences (verbatim supporting quotes, universal), proeth-prov sourceText (the source snippet, on the Step-1/2 provenance layers; Step-3 A/E individuals ground via textReferences only), and the involvement gloss (proeth:caseInvolvement on role individuals, proeth:caseContext on obligation, capability, and constraint individuals). Values are per-individual; the fields do not individuate any type."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Extraction confidence for this individual (0 to 1)." ;
sh:name "confidence" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:confidence ],
[ sh:description "Verbatim case quotes supporting this individual." ;
sh:name "text references" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:textReferences ],
[ sh:description "How this individual figures in the case narrative (role individuals; the same text is routed into rdfs:comment)." ;
sh:name "case involvement" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:caseInvolvement ],
[ sh:description "Grounding context in this case (obligation, capability, and constraint individuals)." ;
sh:name "case context" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:caseContext ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Action,
core:Capability,
core:Constraint,
core:Event,
core:Obligation,
core:Principle,
core:Resource,
core:Role,
core:State .
pcsh:PrincipleDefinitionShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle definition schema (type-level, descriptive, field contract)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What individuates a principle TYPE: its canonical kind (drives the four-kind subClassOf typing; the canonical leaf becomes the rdf:type) and the extensional cases that ground it (McLaren). The five per-case narrative literals and the invokedBy edge are per-individual and now declared on PrinciplePropertyShape, mirroring the RoleDefinitionShape/ProfessionalRolePropertyShape split so the {{ principle_schema }} prompt separates the type judgment from what the case supplies. Descriptive only (no validation result); principle_category is a routing input, not stored as a literal."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal." ;
sh:name "principle kind" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:principleCategory ],
[ sh:description "Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field." ;
sh:name "extensional cases" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:extensionalCases ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .
pcsh:PrinciplePropertyShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle per-case schema (individual data, non-definitional)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What a principle INDIVIDUAL is described by in a specific case: the five narrative literals the defeasibility pipeline consumes and the agent that invokes it. These do NOT individuate the principle TYPE (that is PrincipleDefinitionShape); their values are per-case, asserted on the individual. Descriptive only."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "interpretation" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:interpretation ],
[ sh:description "How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "concrete expression" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:concreteExpression ],
[ sh:description "What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on)." ;
sh:name "applied to" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:appliedTo ],
[ sh:description "The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field." ;
sh:name "balancing with" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:balancingWith ],
[ sh:description "How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "tension resolution" ;
sh:order 5 ;
sh:path proeth:tensionResolution ],
[ sh:description "The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent." ;
sh:name "invoked by" ;
sh:order 6 ;
sh:path core:invokedBy ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
['8', '76']
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-06-04T10:05:37.970804+00:00
First case
8
Match Confidence
0.82
Match Reasoning
The faithful agent or trustee duty is a specific engineering-context expression of the Loyalty principle in the ontology. The existing Loyalty class covers the general concept of professional loyalty to clients and employers. The present principle adds the engineering-specific framing of Canon I.4 and the explicit subordination to public welfare, making it a variant rather than an exact match.
Matched Ontology Label
Loyalty
Matches Existing
true
Generated
2026-06-04T10:05:37.970804+00:00
Attributed to
['Case 8 Extraction', 'claude-sonnet-4-6']