Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 21-2 (2021) · Public Health, Safety, and Welfare–Climate Change Induced Conditions
Professional obligations conflict, and the board applies no fixed rule for which one wins.
Each resolution is recorded as three edges:
competesWith (the tension),
prevailsOver (the obligation the board allowed to win in this case), and
defeasibleUnder (the situation under which the yielding obligation gives way).
The same tension is then traced across comparable cases, where its resolution shifts with context.
Hover any obligation or state to see its definition; click to open it in OntServe.
How this case resolved it competition structure in OntServe
Featured
Engineer A Future Conditions Duty
prevails over
Engineer A Design Compliance Duty
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Outdated Climate Design Standards
Engineer A Public Safety Duty Beyond Law
prevails over
Engineer A Design Compliance Duty
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Outdated Climate Design Standards
What the board concluded
- Engineer A has an obligation to consider potential impacts on public health, safety, and welfare, regardless of whether that is required by applicable law, including changing weather patterns and climate.
- If Engineer A is reasonably certain that the project will result in adverse impacts to public health, safety, and welfare, and if the Client B denies the requisite evaluation, Engineer A should include the concern regarding potential adverse public health, safety, and welfare impacts in an engineering report for consideration by regulatory agencies and the public.
How comparable cases resolved the same tension
Read at the type level, this resolution is: Legal Obligation yields to Future Conditions Consideration Obligation. Comparison across cases happens at this level; the duty types recur while each case's obligations instantiate them.
| Case | Prevailing type | Yielding type | Relation to this case |
|---|---|---|---|
|
93-8
Use Of Broad Indemnification Clause For...
|
Professional Accountability Obligation | Legal Obligation | The yielding type here also yields there, to a different duty |
|
85-3
P.E. Requirement for County Surveyor Position
|
Competence Obligation | Legal Obligation | The yielding type here also yields there, to a different duty |
|
85-3
P.E. Requirement for County Surveyor Position
|
Ethical Conduct Obligation | Legal Obligation | The yielding type here also yields there, to a different duty |
Closest instance-level matches, ranked on the specific obligations and contexts of this case:
| Case | Obligation that prevailed | Yielding obligation | Context (defeasibleUnder) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
89-7
Duty To Report Safety Violations
|
Engineer A Safety Precedence Duty | Engineer A Confidentiality Duty | Code Exception Disclosure Release |