IN THE MATTER OF THE ENGINEERS ACT, 1979 AND IN THE MATTER OF P. L. BAKER - JUDGMENT - COURT OF INQUIRY

Oct 28, 2026

Upload by Mabel

Judgment of the Council of the Association of Professional Engineers of British Columbia following an inquiry under the Engineers Act. The Council considered charges against Mr. P. L. Baker, P.Eng., including alleged violations of the Code of Ethics concerning dangerous conditions in approved drawings, signing/ sealing plans not fully prepared or inadequately supervised, conflicts of interest with employer and client, and acting as both contractor and consulting engineer. After reviewing sworn testimony from six witnesses, the Council found him guilty on all four charges, ordered expulsion, and allocated costs to be borne by Mr. Baker and the Association.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages2

Reading Time5 min

AccessFree to download

JUDGMENT

FACTS IN THE CASE

Charges Against Mr. P. L. Baker, P.Eng.

Council’s Decision and Orders

IN THE MATTER OF THE ENGINEERS ACT,1979ANDIN THE MATTER OF P.L.BAKER,PENG # JUDGMENT The Council of the Association of Professional Engineers ofBritish Columbia under the authority of the Engineers Act,R.S.B.C.,1979,Chapter 109 held an Inquiry on Wednesdayand Thursday,March 5 and 6,1986 with respect to charges ofunprofessional conduct,negligence or misconduct on the partof Mr.P.L.Baker,P.Eng.The charges against Mr.Bakerwere: “1.That contrary to Section 2(a)of the Code of Ethics you did notguard against conditions that were dangerous or threatening to life,limb or property with respect to alterations made to drawing No.D244"The Corporation of the District of Matsqui Extension ofStorm Trunk Sewer Fer Motorcade Plan",a drawing signed andsealed by you. 2.That contrary to Section 6(a)of the Code of Ethics,you signed andsealed plans for that project known as theMatsqui Extension of theStorm Trunk Sewer for Motorcade when these plans were notcompletely prepared by you or were prepared with inadequatesupervision. 3.That contry to SectionsS and 8(a)of the Code of Ehics,youwere in a conflict o interest with your employer in that youundertook in the name of Paul L.Baker and Associates,constructionof a portion of that project known as the District of MatsquiExtension of Storm Trunk Sewer for Motorcade,either alone or inconcert with others,while you were at the same time an employee ofPeter Hogan and Associates Ltd.,the engineering consultants for theProject,and further failed to disclose your circumstances as such toPeter Hogan and Associates Ltd. 4.That contrary to Sections 8 and 8(a)of the Code of Ethics,youwere in a conflict of interest with a client,in that by acting as bothcontractor and consulting engineer on that Project known as theDistrict of Matsqui Extension of Storm Trunk Sewer for Motorcade,you deprived your employer's client of the advice of an independentconsultant with respect to the structural design and construction ofthe Project." Mr.P.L.Baker,P.Eng.was not present at the Inquiryalthough he had been personally served with Notice ofInquiry and had been informed as to the new Inquiry datesthrough his legal counsel.Mr.Baker was not represented bylegal counsel.After consideration of the notice given to Mr.Baker,in accordance with Section 30(3)of the Engineers Act1979,Council proceeded with the case in Mr.Baker's absence. After due consideration of evidence produced by sixwitnesses,Council judged Mr.Baker to be guilty of all fourcharges and ordered that he be expelled from the Associationof Professional Engineers of British Columbia,effective March 7,1986.Council further ordered that Mr.Baker's costs shouldbe borne by himself and the Association's costs borne by theAssociation.Mr.Glenn Urquhart and Miss Linda Nowlan ofVancouver were legal counsel for the Association. # COURT OF INQUIRY FACTS IN THE CASE There was no agreed statement of facts.During presentationof the case,Council heard from six witnesses.The followingparagraphs contain a summary of the facts which wereobtained directly from sworn witnesses or from documentsidentified by those witnesses.These facts were accepted byCouncil. 1.Mr.P.L.Baker,P.Eng.,is registered as a member ingood standing with the Association of Professional Engineersof British Columbia and has been a member continuouslysince 1978. 2.The Engineers Act,R.S.B.C.1979,Chapter 109,asamended,and the Code of Ethics of the Association apply tothe Inquiry by Council. 3.At all material times,Mr.Baker was employed and/orretained by Peter Hogan and Associates Ltd.as a professionalengineer and performed all relevant engineering services as aprofessional engineer. 4.Peter Hogan and Associates Ltd.were the professionalengineers for that Project which later became known as 'TheCorporation of the District of Matsqui Extension of StormTrunk Sewer for Motorcade Plan”(the"Project")whichinvolved installation of a culvert and filling a ravine in whichthe culvert was located. 5.A consul

FAQs

What were the four main charges against Mr. P. L. Baker, P.Eng.?

The charges alleged violations of the Code of Ethics regarding failure to guard against dangerous conditions in alterations to drawings, signing sealed plans not completely prepared or inadequately supervised, conflicts of interest with his employer, and conflicts of interest with a client by acting as both contractor and consulting engineer.

Was Mr. Baker present or represented during the inquiry?

Mr. Baker was not present at the inquiry, though he had been served with notice and informed of the dates through his legal counsel. He was not represented by legal counsel during the proceedings.

What was the outcome of the inquiry and what orders did the Council make?

After considering evidence from six witnesses, the Council found Mr. Baker guilty of all four charges and ordered that he be expelled from the Association effective March 7, 1986. The Council also ordered that costs be borne by Mr. Baker and the Association.

Oct 28, 2026

Upload by Mabel