Anda di halaman 1dari 68

PPE Guide to Passing:

Streamline Your PPE Preparation in Ontario


Version 5.26

This guide has been designed for Ontario Professional Practice Exams dated up until
December, 2016. If you are writing your exam at a later date, be sure to obtain the latest guide
from http://www.practiceppeexams.ca/ppe-guide.html as the scope and syllabus may change
along with this guide.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

our lawyer made us write this . . .

COPYRIGHT
Copyright 2016 by practicePPEexams.ca. All Rights Reserved

PracticePPEexams.ca authorizes you to view the PPE Practice Exam Guide


(hereafter referred to as PPE Guide) for your individual use. In exchange for
this authorization, you agree not to modify, sell or reproduce the PPE Guide for
public or commercial use, including display on a website or networked
environment. Unauthorized duplication or distribution of this material in any form
is strictly prohibited. Violators will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law
and any copyright infringement act will be brought to the attention of your
engineering Association.
This guide is for individual use only. If you would like to have this guide available
to your company for other aspiring engineers, please contact the author at
info@practiceppeexams.ca for corporate rates.
No part of this PPE Guide may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electrical, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the author. This
eBook is encrypted and can notify the owner if distributed illegally.

DISCLAIMER
The author of this product does not make any warranty (expressed or implied) or
assume any liability or responsibility, to you or any 3 rd parties for the accuracy,
completeness, or use of, or reliance on, any information contained in the PPE
Guide, or for any injuries, losses or damages arising out of such use or reliance.
As a condition of use, you agree not to sue and to waive and release
practicePPEexams.ca and its owner from any and all claims, demands and
causes of action for injuries, losses or damages that you may incur as a result of
your use of, or reliance on, the PPE Guide.
PracticePPEexams.ca is independent of all Associations (e.g. PEO) that
administer the PPE and our questions are based on the exam scope and
syllabus.
This eBook is for information only. It does not represent nor should it be relied
upon as legal advice. It should not be used for any other purpose than preparing
for the PPE.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Contents
Introduction
Tips for Passing Part A Ethics & Professional Practice
Tips for Passing Part B - Law
What to Bring to the Exam
What Not to Bring to the Exam

4
11
11
12
12

Definitions

13

Text Books Important Chapters

31

Ethics - Long Answer Questions

32

Law - Long Answer Questions

37

Practice Exam #1
Solutions to Practice Exam #1

42
50

Next Steps

56

Top National Employers That Hire Aspiring Engineers

57

Appendix A - Section 72 (Professional Misconduct)

65

Appendix B - Section 77 (Code of Ethics)

66

PPE Cheat Sheet

67

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Introduction
Making your journey to a Professional Engineer (P.Eng.) or P.Geo. is an exciting
one, yet it requires dedication, patience and focus. As shown in Figure 1 below,
there are several requirements to become a P.Eng.; one of them requires you to
pass your Professional Practice Exam (PPE) 1. Perhaps you have visited the
PEO website, received a study package in the mail and purchased a couple of
textbooks. Now what? Time is running out, so where should you begin?

1. Submit
Application

2. Academic
qualifications
reviewed

3. Write Professional
Practice Exam (PPE)

4. Submit
Experience
Record

5. Final
Review

6. Licence
Awarded
Figure 1: The Licensing Process for Graduates of Accredited University Programs
Source: Canadian Professional Engineering and Geoscience text

With about 5 weeks to my exam, I began studying. I read the required


textbooks, tried to make sense of the PE Act, made lists of what I thought were
useful definitions and then practiced old PPE exams. This process was very
frustrating for a number of reasons. Firstly, it took me a lot of time and effort to
compile all of the definitions and I had no idea which definitions "frequently

For internationally educated folks, the licencing process is a bit different but you
still have to write the PPE in the middle of the process.
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

appeared" on past exams. Also, after I practiced old exams, I didn't have a
trusted resource to compare my answers with.
Looking back, if I would have only studied what I needed to I could have saved
myself a lot of time and effort. I made it my goal to write this guide with the
purpose of saving you time by focusing you in on the important aspects of the
PPE. My hope is that you have more knowledge and confidence when you enter
the exam room.
As a student of continuous improvement, I am keeping a close eye on the
development of the PPE to ensure that this document remains up-to-date. I
always welcome your feedback and any input you may have to make this
document the best value it can be. If you have a question, notice something is
not clear, or notice a factual error, please let me know. I will respond to you,
update this Guide and email you the latest version.
You can submit your comments and suggestions by sending us a note at
info@practicePPEexams.ca.
Sincerely,

Gavin Simone, P.Eng.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Where To Start
Some of us study well in advance while others leave it to the last minute. Ive
chosen a 5-week timeframe as I feel this is enough time to digest the material
and practice some questions. If you pick up new ideas quickly, feel free to use
less time. On the other hand, if you prefer to study a bit slower, feel free to
extend our recommended timeline.
This guide is designed such that you can work full-time and study for 2-3 hours
each weeknight and 4-5 hours on the weekends. The total study time will
depend on your existing knowledge and your ability to retain information. If you
study on the lower end it will work out to 90 hours and the higher end is 125.
Week 1
Step 1: Register for the exam and purchase both textbooks - Canadian
Professional Engineering and Geoscience: Practice and Ethics (5th edition),
AND Law for Professional Engineers, Canadian and Global Insights (4th
edition).
Step 2: Review key definitions on flashcards and practice them until the
concepts are clear to you. The next chapter provides you with access to a
flashcard website to practice all of the key definitions as well as textbook page
references for additional information.
Week 2
Step 3: Read the important chapters of the above textbooks. These key chapters
are listed in a later section.
Week 3
Step 4: Re-review the definitions and the flashcard website studied in Step 3. If
anything is unclear, visit the appropriate textbook section to gain a deeper
understanding of the topic.
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Week 4-5
Step 5: Practice the sample exam questions provided in this guide. Compare
your solutions with the answers provided. Be sure to answer the question before
looking at the solution. If you are struggling with any types of questions, be sure
to re-read those sections of the text again to cement the information.
Step 6: Write the test. Wait 8-10 weeks for your passing letter in the mail.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Exam Overview
Here is some information about the exam to give you an overview of what to
expect:

The exam is made up of 200 marks, broken out as follows:


o 100 for Part A Professional Practice and Ethics

Question 1 Definitions (25 marks). You will need to define


or explain 4 or 5 concepts or terms. You will not get to
choose which terms to define, so be prepared to define all
terms.

Question 2 Long Answer (25 marks)

Question 3 Long Answer (25 marks)

Question 4 Long Answer (25 marks)

o 100 for Part B Engineering Law and Professional Liability

Question 1 Definitions (25 marks). Choose 5 of 8 terms to


define, explain or answer. Since you are given choice here,
knowing all of the Law definitions are not as critical as the
Ethics definitions.

Question 2 Long Answer (25 marks)

Question 3 Long Answer (25 marks)

Question 4 Long Answer (25 marks)

The next two pages will show you visually how Part A and Part B are structured.
It is recommended that you print out the next two pages for easy reference.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Tips for Passing Part A Ethics & Professional Practice


In order to do well on Part A, you will need to:

Obtain at least 50/100 marks.

For question 1 (short answer questions) provide a definition or explanation


for 4-5 terms.

For long answer questions, be very familiar with sections 72 (Professional


Misconduct) and 77 (Code of Ethics) from the 1990 Ontario Regulation
941 which will be supplied at the exam. This guide will demonstrate how
to use this regulation in a subsequent section.

For long answer questions, ensure that you provide full answers and
never simply state Yes or No.

Since the exam is 3 hours long, if you have passed the 90-minute mark it
is a good idea to finish up Part A and start on Part B. When you finish
Part B you can come back and finish Part A.

Budget your time. Each question is worth 25 marks and you should try to
do them in 22.5 minutes or less, otherwise you are sacrificing time for
other questions.

Write clearly and concisely. Practice the sample exam(s) (included in this
guide) and ask a friend or colleague if they can read and understand your
writing. Since most communication is done through computers these
days, it might take some practice getting your printing skills back. Avoid
hand writing if possible as it is generally harder to read than printing.

Tips for Passing Part B - Law


In order to do well on Part B, you will need to:

Obtain at least 50/100 marks.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Define 5 of 8 terms.

See the above tips for budgeting your time, providing full answers and
writing clearly and concisely.

What to Bring to the Exam

1 piece of photo identification (e.g. drivers licence, current passport,


health card with picture, etc).

Your PEO #

3 or more pens. Select high quality pens that allow you to write clearly.

a water bottle to keep you hydrated.

What Not to Bring to the Exam

handbags & briefcases

books or similar items

study notes or cheat sheets

cell phones or other electronics.

If you are not sure if an item is allowed into the exam, ask the person(s) on
staff for clarification.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Definitions
There are numerous definitions that you could be tested on. Answering this
section well is critical to succeeding on your exam as 50/200 marks are for
definitions (25 marks for Ethics and 25 for Law). Comparing 10 PPEs in the last
5 years, below are the most frequent definitions that have appeared as well as
the ones that PEO wants you to learn. All the definitions are important, however
definitions that we marked with an * are extra important because they frequently
appear in long answer questions as well. We recommend that you learn the "*"
definitions as a minimum.

If you have additional time, I suggest you to

understand the rest.


In addition, to speed up your comprehension, we have put the definitions below
on a flashcard website if you prefer to learn that way. To access the site, visit:

https://quizlet.com/112647165/flashcards (Ethics terms)

https://quizlet.com/112657954/flashcards (Law terms)

Quizlet has really impressed me with their learning tools, which is why I use
them exclusively. Within the Quizlet links just mentioned you can do:
- flashcards (a great way to get familiar with all the
definitions)

- gives you the answer first and then you have to come up
with the term
- make the terms and definitions disappear by dragging them
on top of one another.

If any of the definitions are not clear or you require more information, you can
review the 6 key resources:
1. Canadian Professional Engineering and Geosciences - Practice and
Ethics (5th edition). Below referred to as 'Ethics Text'. You can borrow

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

the textbook from your local library (if available) or you can buy it from
Amazon.ca.
2. Law for Professional Engineers, Canadian and Global Insights (4th
edition). Below referred to as 'Law Text'. Borrow it or buy it from
Amazon.ca.
3. Professional Engineers Act - RSO 1990, Chapter P.28. Below referred
to as 'PE Act'. You probably received a copy with your package from the
PEO, but it is available online for free.
4. Professional Engineers Act - General RRO 1990, Reg 941. Below
referred to as 'General RRO. You probably received a copy with your
package from the PEO, but it is available online for free.
5. PEO - By-Law No. 1. Below referred to as 'By-Law'. You probably
received a copy with your package from the PEO, but it is available online
for free.
6. PEO Website

Provided below are the definitions/terms in table format. Where it says 'Ethics
Text Page #' this refers you to the textbook Canadian Professional Engineering
and Geoscience: Practice and Ethics. Similarly, 'Law Text Page #' refers to
Practical Law of Architecture, Engineering and Geoscience.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

The Ethics Definitions include:

# of
times
used

Ethics Text
Page #

Enforcement*

53

Consulting Engineer
requirements*

51, 111

Ethics
Definition/Concept

Temporary License
requirements and
limitations.*

(unless noted
otherwise)

Briefly Define or Explain


Enforcement is prosecuting individuals or entities that
practice engineering without a licence, or offer engineering
services to the public without holding a Certificate of
Authorization (CofA).
Requirements in Ontario are:
Be a licenced P.Eng in good standing
Obtain a Certificate of Authorization (CofA) from the
PEO or work for a company/partnership with one.
Have 5+ years of experience beyond the 4 required for
registration. 2+ years of that experience must be for
the private sector.
Must have professional liability insurance

Designation of Consulting Engineer expires 5 years from the


date of issuance.
42.
This type of license is designed to allow out-of-province
General RRO engineers to work in the province of the project.
Requirements are:
section 42
(1).
licensed in another province/territory;
qualified to work on a specific project and are familiar
with the applicable codes, standards and laws.
collaborate with a member of the local Association (this
may waived if the applicant is highly qualified)

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Ethics
Definition/Concept

Discipline*

# of
times
used

Ethics Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

52-53

68-69

When being disciplined,


list 3 penalties/sanctions*

Meaning of "Self
Regulating Profession"*

33, 37

Certificate of
Authorization (CofA)*:

PEO Website

Briefly Define or Explain


Limitations are noted on the licence itself and include:
works, facilities, machinery, equipment to which the
license relates;
name of the Member with whom collaboration is with (if
applicable)
period of time (max 12 months)
name of person, firm or corporation whom the holder is
employed or engaged to perform engineering services
Purpose is to reprimand, suspend or expel members who are
guilty of professional misconduct.
Choose 3 of the following:
Revoke the licence
Suspend the licence
Impose restrictions on the licence (e.g. needs to be
supervised)
Require the practitioner to pay the cost of the
investigation and hearing
Require the practitioner to take a course or write
examinations set by the Association
Impose a fine
Each province/territory has passed an Act to form an
Association of professional engineers, which in turn regulate
the profession.
A CofA is a licence issued by the PEO that allows individuals
and businesses to offer and provide professional engineering

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Ethics
Definition/Concept

# of
times
used

Ethics Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

Briefly Define or Explain


services to the public. This is different from a P.Eng licence
that allows an individual to practice professional engineering
for him/herself or their employer.

Who/what can receive a


CofA*?

A CofA can be issued to a person, partnership or a


corporation.

What are the


requirements*?

Limited License
requirements and
limitations*

Requirements:
The applicant must designate a professional engineer
who is an employee or partner in the firm to assume
professional responsibility for the services provided.
The designated engineer must have 5+ years of
professional engineering experience beyond university.
Carry professional liability insurance or disclose to
every client that they dont have it and obtain written
acknowledgement of this disclosure.
General RRO A limited License holder is not a P.Eng but is someone with a
- Section 45- technical background and whom has signification specialized
46
experience.
Limitations:
Practice of professional engineering by the holder of
the licence must be limited to the services specified by
the licence.
When the holder of the licence ceases to provide the
services specified, they must notify the Registrar and
return the licence and seal.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Ethics
Definition/Concept

# of
times
used

Ethics Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

Briefly Define or Explain

Requirements:
Either or both of the following:
o 3-year diploma in engineering technology or
equivalent from a Council approved institution
o 4-year honours science degree or equivalent from a
Council approved university
10 years of Council approved experience in
engineering work beyond graduation.
Passed the PPE
Good Character
General RRO Not displaying a licence is a violation of the Code of Ethics
- Section
77.2.iv.
77.2.iv

Consequences of a
P.Eng not permanently
displaying his/her
licence*

Engineer's Seal purpose and 2 elements


to accompany it*

97-99

PEO objectives (as


specified by the Act)

PE Act Section 2(34)

The seal signifies that the author assumes professional


responsibility and accountability for the document; that he/she
has given serious thought to the content and declares that
others can rely on the design, facts and judgments contained
within.
The seal must be signed and dated.
Principal object of the Association is to regulate the practice of
professional engineers and to govern its members, holders of
CofA, holders of license in accordance with the Act,
regulations and by-laws in order to service and protect the
public interests.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Ethics
Definition/Concept

Professional Engineer
(P.Eng.) Licence*

# of
times
used

Ethics Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

Other objectives:
Establish, maintain and develop standards:
of knowledge and skills among its members;
of qualification and stands of practice for the
practice of professional engineering; and
of profession ethics among its members
Promote public awareness of role of the Association
Professional Engineer (P.Eng.) is a type of licence issued by
the PEO.

List 5 Requirements?

Briefly Define or Explain

PEO website
under P.Eng
Licence
Overall
Requirements

Profession

15-16

Roles of PEOs:
Complaints Committee &

PE Act Section 24

Requirements in Ontario:
Age: 18+ years old
Character: Must be of good character.
Education: Academic qualification, such as an engineering
degree from an accredited university
Experience: 4+ years of suitable experience, with 1+ year
in Canada.
Knowledge of Ethics and Law: Need to write and pass the
Professional Practice Exam (PPE).
Profession is:
Self-regulating group
With specialized knowledge, skills, education
performing of a public service
Complaints Committee: investigate complaints from members
or the public regarding the conduct or actions of a member,
CofA, or licence holder. The committee may take the matter to

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Ethics
Definition/Concept

# of
times
used

Ethics Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

Discipline Committee

the Discipline Committee only after the complaint has been


fully investigated and the accused has had a chance to
explain their actions.
PE Act Section 28(14)

Public (as in offer


services to the 'public')

Membership
requirements for
Engineering Intern &
Engineering Student

PEOs disciplinary
process.

Briefly Define or Explain

412;
PE Act Section 12.2
PEO Website

Discipline Committee: hears the allegations of member, CofA,


or licence holder presented by the Complaints Committee. It
has the power to discipline the accused.
Any person or organization, except for the employer.

Engineering Intern Program has 2 sub programs:


Engineer in Training (EIT) - requirements
pays yearly membership fee
applies for program in writing
graduate of an accredited engineering program or
approved equivalent

66-69

Engineering Student - requirements


pays yearly membership fee
enrolled in an accredited undergraduate engineering
program in Canada
The 3 stages of the disciplinary process are:
1. Gather evidence
2. Investigation and peer review
3. Discipline hearing

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

# of
times
used

Ethics Text
Page #

Fee Mediation
Committee

PE Act Section 32

Mediate any written complaint by a client regarding the fees of


an engineer, CofA or licence holder.

Who elects and who


appoints members of the
PEO Council

PE Act
Section 3(2)

Provisional License
requirements*

42

Composition of Council
15 to 20 Council members are elected by the members
of the Association.
5 to 7 Council members are appointed by the
Lieutenant Governor in Council
3-5 are not members and who are appointed by the
Lieutenant Governor in Council
Requirements: Satisfied all of the application requirements
(18+ years old, must be able to communicate effectively (both
orally and written) in the working language of the
province/territory, academic qualification, pass PPE, citizen or
landed immigrant, 4+ years of suitable experience) except the
1+ year of experience in Canada.
Limitation: Practice under the supervising of a licensed P.Eng.
The supervising P.Eng must sign all final documents. Licence
valid for 12 months.

Ethics
Definition/Concept

(unless noted
otherwise)

Briefly Define or Explain

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

The Law Definitions include:

Law Definition/Concept

# of times
used

Law Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

Rule of contra proferentem*

136

Secret commission*

179-180

Contact A in tendering* (and


how it can be breached)

120-128

Discoverability concept* (as


it relates to limitation
periods)

71-75

Briefly Define and Explain


A contract term that is ambiguous will be interpreted
against the party that drafted that provision.
Giving or receiving a bribe or kickback to show
favour or disfavor to a person or company.
Deals with the tendering phase of a contract.
Contract A is made when the owners offer is
accepted by the bidder(s) upon the submission of
each compliant bid. Several Contracts A can be
formed; the number will equal the amount of
compliant tenders submitted.
Note: Contract B is the second contract that is
formed on award of the contract.
The landmark case of Ron Engineering established
this distinction of contracts.
A claim, lawsuit or action for tort or breach of
contract must be commenced within a certain
timeframe (Limitation Period) for it to be considered
by the courts. The discoverability concept defines
that the limitation period commences when a claim
is discovered; an injury, loss or damage occurs; or
the date on which a reasonable person would have
discovered the loss/damage.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Law Definition/Concept
Dispute Resolution Board*
(DRB)

# of times
used
5

Law Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

31-32, 239,
246-247

5 examples of employment
rights under Ontario's
Human Rights Code*

322-323

Duress*

110-111

Statutory holdback* (under


the Lien Act)

214, 252-253

Briefly Define and Explain


A DRB is a form of project-based dispute resolution
where the persons on the board (usually 3)
recommend or decide on solutions to disputes
thought the course of the projects.
The persons sitting on the board have expertise in
the area of the project and ideally make decisions in
an unbiased, objective and independent basis.
Choose any 5 of the following: Race, ancestry,
place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship,
creed, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status,
family status, record of offences, or handicap.
Persuading a party to enter into a contract by
threatened or actual violence or imprisonment.
A technique imposed by Provincial Lien Acts to
ensure that those working for the general contractor,
such as a sub-contractor, are paid by the general.
How this works: the owner holds back a certain
percentage (e.g. 10% in Ontario) from each of the
contractors invoices. At the end of the project, the
sub-contractor has the opportunity to file a lien if
they have not been paid what is owed. If a lien is
not filed after a certain time frame, the owner can
pay the general contractor the holdback amount. If
there is a lien filed, the owner must wait until the lien
is resolved.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Law Definition/Concept

# of times
used

Law Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

Parol evidence rule*

136-137

Bid shopping*

131-133

Essential elements of an
enforceable contract*

79

Briefly Define and Explain


Is a contract law rule that prohibits evidence that
contradicts or adds to the contract terms that make
up an agreement.
The idea is that parties have summarized their
agreement into a single contract and other terms
should not be enforced without making an
amendment to the contract.
It happens when price negotiations happen after the
tender closes. Considered by many to be unethical.
The 5 elements are:
1. Offer made and accepted;
2. Mutual intent to enter into the contract;
3. Consideration (something of value will be
exchanged);
4. Capacity of contract (e.g. not inebriated when
signed the contract, cant be a minor, etc);
5. Lawful purpose (e.g. cant enforce a contract
to have a party smuggle illegal drugs in to the
country on your behalf)

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Law Definition/Concept

# of times
used

Law Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

Limitation periods applicable


to tort and contract law in
Ontario*

71-75

How arbitration awards are


enforced internationally

29-30

Vicarious liability*

52-55

Why is arbitration often


used*

29-30, 235238

Briefly Define and Explain


From the time that an injury or loss occurs the party
that suffered has a time frame to when they can
pursue litigation, action or a claim against a
professional engineer. The limitation periods are
defined by The Limitations Act, 2002 and 2006
amendments, which specifies:
Basic limitation period of 2 years
Ultimate limitation period of 15 years
Contracting parties are allowed to agree to
shorten or extent the basic limitation period
and to shorten extend or suspend the
ultimate limitation period with certain
restrictions set out by the Act.
Arbitration awards are enforced internationally under
the New York Convention if the countries involved
have ratified the convention.
The employer is liable for the negligence of an
employee that causes injury or damages. The
purpose is to compensate the injured party and the
employer is presumed to be in a better financial
position than the employee to compensate.
It is used because it is often less costly, takes less
time and is less public than litigation.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Law Text
Page #

Law Definition/Concept

# of times
used

The New York Convention

30, 245

Liquidated Damages*

150, 214

Fraudulent
misrepresentation*

(unless noted
otherwise)

109

Briefly Define and Explain


Over 140 countries have ratified the New York
Convention that is a foundational instrument for
international arbitration. It allows arbitral awards to
be recognized and enforced in the countries that
have ratified.
A contract clause used to minimize risks associated
with performance. Liquidated damages are preestimates of the damages that may result from a
non-performance under the contract.
Example: an owner hires a contractor to install
photo technology on a new toll road so that it can
charge motorists for using the road. They agree on
a payment amount of $5,000 per day if the
contractor does not have the equipment installed by
July 1st. The $5,000 is the owners estimate of its
daily-lost revenue from not charging motorist to use
its road.
A misrepresentation is an untrue statement or
assertion of fact. It is fraudulent when the party
knowingly or recklessly uses it to induce another
party to enter into a contract. The misled party is
usually entitled to the following: rescind the contract,
claim compensation for costs incurred as a result of
entering into the contract, and sue for damages for
deceit.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Law Definition/Concept
Equitable estoppel*

# of times
used
1

Law Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

92-96, 97

Briefly Define and Explain


A legal term that describes an action that the courts
can use to prevent a party from enforcing the strict
wording of the contract when that party has
extended a gratuitous promise that puts the other
party at a disadvantage.
Example: an Owner and Contractor enter into a
contract to build an airplane hangar that is to be built
by July 1. Halfway through the project the Owner
decides she is going on summer vacation and
verbally tells the Contractor that he can finish by
September 1. On June 20, the Owner misses her
flight and decides not to go on vacation and
demands the hangar to be built by their contract
date of July 1st. The Contractor refuses since he did
not plan to have the material/labour lined up until
September 1. The Owner takes the Contractor to
court to sue for damages, but the judge denies the
claims by using an estoppel that prevents the Owner
from enforcing the strict wording of the contract
since there was a gratuitous promise extended and
going back to the contract wording would put the
contractor at a loss.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Law Definition/Concept

# of times
used

Law Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

Corporate director's
standard of care

20-22

Tort*

37

Every director of a corporation in exercising his/her


powers and discharging his/her duty shall:
Act honestly and in good faith with a view to
the best interests of the corporation; and
Exercise the care, diligence and skill that a
reasonably responsible person would
exercise in a similar circumstance.
A private or civil wrong or injury, one that involves
negligence and that may arrive independently of
contract.

38-39

Tort liability criteria*

Gratuitous promise*

Briefly Define and Explain

92

Must satisfy all 3:


a) The defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of
care,
b) The defendant breached the duty by his/her
conduct; and
c) The defendants conduct caused the injury to
the plaintiff.
A promise that a party makes without consideration
(something of value exchanged).
E.g. When an owner allows a contractor an
extension to finish a bridge without imposing the
penalty outlined in the contract.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Law Definition/Concept

# of times
used

Law Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

Briefly Define and Explain

Director's conflict of interest

23

True construction approach

159-162

Director's fiduciary duty

21

Unilateral Mistake

115-119

Each director is required to disclose his/her personal


interest in any material contract or transaction to
which the corporation is involved. The director must
not vote in any such contract or transaction.
An exemption clause (which is a contract provision
used to limit liability or protect a party from being
sued) will be scrutinized by a strict construction of its
wording. If the clause is clear and direct it will be
upheld unless it is unconscionable. Looking at the
wording of the clause is said to be the true
construction test or approach.
The obligation to behave honestly, in good faith and
in the best interests of the corporation.
A mistake made by one party to a contract.

Common Law

2, 33-35,
103-104

A legal system that is developed by judges through


past case precedents and similar tribunal.
It is used in many countries with ties to the British
Legal System such as: Canada (except Quebec),
USA (except Louisiana) New Zealand, India, etc.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Law Definition/Concept
Specific Performance

# of times
used
1

Law Text
Page #
(unless noted
otherwise)

152

Concurrent Tortfeasors*

55-56

Quantum Meruit*

150

Partnering on Construction
Projects

11, 238

Briefly Define and Explain


To resolve a contract dispute, a judge may order a
party to perform a certain part of the contract. This
action is the specific performance that the
judge/court feels would remedy the dispute (e.g.
sale of land).
Note: The court will not order specific performance
for an action that it needs to supervise or verify (e.g.
installation of machinery, engineering services).
Occurs when more than 1 party is liable for the tort.
The defendants are said to be concurrent
tortfeasors.
When services have been requested and performed
without a payment agreement in place. In such a
situation, the courts will award an amount based on
a quantum meruit as much as is reasonably
deserved for the time spend and materials
supplied.
When 2 or more companies join together to take
advantage of their combined skills and share the
profit or loss while delivering a construction project.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Text Books Important Chapters


The important chapters to read of the Ethics and Law books are listed directly
below.

Ethics (5th edition):

Chapter 2 Regulation of Engineering and Geoscience


Chapter 3 Disciplinary Power and Procedures
Chapter 4 Basic Concepts of Professional Practice
Chapter 6 Hazards, Liability, Standards, and Safety
Chapter 7 Computers, Software, and Intellectual Property
Chapter 8 Fairness and Equity in the Professional Workplace
Chapter 9 Principles of Ethics and Justice
Chapter 10 Ethics Concepts and Cases: Employment
Chapter 11 Ethics Concepts and Cases: Management
Chapter 12 Ethics Concepts and Cases: Consulting
Chapter 13 Environmental Ethics
Chapter 16 Writing the Professional Practice Exam

Law (4th edition):

Chapter 1 The Canadian Legal System


Chapter 2 Business Organizations
Chapter 4 Tort Liability
Chapter 5 & 6 Limitation Periods, Proof
Chapter 7 to 24 - Contract Law
Chapter 28 Arbitration and ADR
Chapter 30 Lien Legislation
Chapter 32 Regulatory Aspects and Ethics
Chapter 33 Intellectual Property
Chapter 36 Laws Relating to Employment
Appendix Commentary and Sample Case Studies

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Ethics - Long Answer Questions


Before jumping into the practice exam(s), I've taken the liberty of comparing 10
previous PPEs to find the common types of questions that have been asked.
They are:

Ethics Questions
Ethical Obligations & Issues (what
should you/he/she do now?)

# of times used
12

Conflict of interest & Moonlighting

Non-qualified workers

Lets look at each question type in detail so that when faced with the question on
the exam you can deal with it properly.
Ethical Obligations & Issues (what would you/he/she do now?)
With any long answer question for the Ethics section, you are going to need to
utilize sections 72 (Professional Misconduct) and 77 (Code of Ethics) from the
1990 Ontario Regulation 941. Sections 72 and 77 are provided in the Appendix
of this document and we recommend that you print them off for easy reference.
The general ethical obligation questions will typically describe a sticky situation
that someone has gotten into. They normally ask you to comment on the
person(s) behaviour and may ask you to provide a recommendation for what to
do next. When answering, use section 72 and 77 to frame your answer and
provide a solution. Lets look at an example question to show you how this is
referenced.
Sample Question
Dave, a P.Eng. is hired by Anthony to provide expert advice on the installation of
a generator being installed in a rural northern community. He has all the
necessary licences to be providing these services (P.Eng and Certificate of
Authorization (CofA)). Anthony, who is also a P.Eng., is responsible for
supervising all construction labour.
Upon arrival of the construction site, Dave notices that there are no workplace
safety and health procedures in place for the work crew. For instance, no one is
wearing hard hats, safety shoes or eye protection. There is also no workplace
health and safety committee and no workplace training.
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

(15)

(a) Does Dave, who is hired to give only technical advice about the
installation of the generator have any obligation with respect to the safety
of the work crew?

(10)

(b) What are the responsibilities of Anthony?

Suggested solution:
(Author Comments: To answer this question we must scan sections 72 and 77 to
see if there are any clear obligations and responsibilities of Professional
Misconduct or Code of Ethics. To answer the question, nearly every sentence
should have a reference to sections 72 and/or 77. Be sure not to quote the
clauses word-for-word.)
(a)
Workplace safety is the responsibility of everyone. Dave does have an
obligation to safeguard the life and health of the work crew 72(2)(b). He has a
duty to make a reasonable attempt to ensure that safety regulations and codes
are being followed 72(2)(d) and a responsibility to either correct or report a
situation that may endanger the safety of others 72(2)(c) without fear of favour
77(8). Furthermore, Dave must regard the public (i.e. work crew) welfare as
paramount 77(2)(i) and must co-operate with his fellow professional 77(6) to
quickly resolve the situation.
(b)
Anthony, as the supervisor of all construction labour, is ultimately
responsible to ensure the proper safety codes and standards are followed
72(2)(d) and to ensure that the correct committees, training and equipment are in
place to safeguard the life and health of the work crew 72(2)(b). He is required
to correct the situation that may endanger the safety of the public 72(2)(c).

Conflict of Interest & Moonlighting


Similar to the above, with a conflict of interest and moonlighting questions we will
review sections 72 (Professional Misconduct) and 77 (Code of Ethics) from the
1990 Ontario Regulation 941 to see what clauses apply to the situation. A reread of the Ethics book chapter 10 Ethics in Professional Employment, is a good
idea too.
Conflict of Interest can appear in many ways such as someone who is: getting
bribed; influenced by a person of power to do something wrong; trying to
repurpose the intellectual property of one company and use it for another
company; etc.
Moonlighting is when one person is working for more than one company.
Sample Question
TestIT is a company that tests products for manufactures to ensure they are
made according to standards. You are a P.Eng. and have been working for
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

TestIT for 5 years as a full-time employee. Your role is to supervise the tests on
various products. Your expertise and knowledge have attracted a number of
companies interested in hiring you on a private basis (i.e. outside of TestIT) to
advise them of their product design. Youre happy to make a little money on the
evenings and weekends by occasionally undertaking this work.
One morning at TestIT, you are given the job of supervising the tests and issuing
a report on a new product just submitted to TestIT. You smile when you realize
that the product was submitted by one of your own manufacturing clients that you
provided weekend design input for.
(10) (a)

Comment on the appropriateness of how you have set up your


working arrangements.

(10) (b)

How should you deal with the testing of the new product?

(5)

Is being a professional engineer sufficient to provide design input to


your own clients? Explain.

(c)

Suggested solution:
(Author Comments: By reading the question, it should be apparent to you that
this is a moonlighting question since 1 person is working under two different
companies (TestIT and his own). Moonlighting is not illegal or unethical if you:
disclose your situation to your full-time employer, be satisfied that the work will
not interfere with your full-time job responsibilities, and provide your own clients
with a written statement of the nature of your status at your full-time job and your
limitations to serving the client. This is covered in Section 77(5) of the Regulation
941. After recognizing that this is a moonlighting question we would again scan
sections 72 and 77 to see if there are any clear obligations and responsibilities of
Professional Misconduct or Code of Ethics.)
(a)

The working arrangement is not satisfactory since:

My moonlighting may interfere with my responsibilities at TestIT


I have not advised TestIT of my side business; and
I have not advised my clients about my status with TestIT and my
limitations, 77(5).

(b)
I should not accept the testing of the new product as it is clearly a conflict
of interest 72(2)(i) and may influence my judgment, 77(3), 77(4). Before proceed
in my role at TestIT, I must immediately disclose my side business to TestIT and
my own clients 77(5) and discuss this conflict with TestIT to determine if the
moonlighting is acceptable going forward.
(c)
Holding a professional engineering licence is not sufficient to providing
design input. A Certificate of Authorization (CofA) would be required since there
is no other engineer with a CofA to assume responsibility on my behalf. A CofA

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

is required to provide services to the public in Ontario to ensure the public has
someone with extensive experience and liability insurance.

Non-Qualified Workers
These types of questions are easy to spot because of the terms used in the
question like: junior or fresh out of university. It could also refer to someone
who is qualified but who is working outside of his/her expertise. Like all Ethics
questions, we will utilize sections 72 (Professional Misconduct) and 77 (Code of
Ethics) from the 1990 Ontario Regulation 941 to see what clauses apply to the
situation.
Sample Question
After 10 years of learning the ropes, Julie, an experienced P.Eng., branched out
and started her own structural design firm called Julie's Engineering Design
which provides professional engineering services to the public. She then
became busy due to her quality designs and fast turnaround times. As a result,
Julie hired Sam, a recent graduate with an engineering degree who just
completed his Masters in Civil Engineering. Sam wrote a thesis paper entitled
'Building Structurally Sound Offices in Earthquake Zones'. Julie's plan was to
teach her expertise to Sam and learn a little about designing for seismic events
from him.
A year after Sam was hired, Julie's Engineering Design was approached about
creating the structural design drawings for a new office building in Tokyo, Japan.
Julie quickly accepted since this would be the perfect opportunity to leverage
both of their skills. Sam had never designed an office building before, but knew
some of the key considerations needed for earthquake zones. Julie, having
designed office buildings before, had never design for an earthquake zone and
knew nothing about the local building code. With pressure from her client, Julie
figured they would overdesign the structural which they figured would "be strong
enough for any earthquake". They quickly finished the design and Julie stamped
it and sent it off to the client.
[25]

Discuss the conduct of Julie. What if anything should She be


concerned about?

Suggested solution:
(Author Comments: You will notice how the questioned is framed to quickly let
you know that Julie's Engineering Design is unqualified to provide these
professional services. We will refer to sections 72 and 77 to guide our response
and note any clear obligations and responsibilities of Professional Misconduct or
Code of Ethics.)

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

[25]

Julie has shown serious professional misconduct by performing work


that her firm is not competent to perform 72(2)(h). By submitting a
drawing without knowledge of the local codes 72(2)(d) she has failed to
safeguard human life 72(2)(b) and has not put public welfare as her
paramount duty 77(2)(i).
Julie should be concern about the following:

Setting a bad example for Sam by limiting his ability to develop


professionally 77(7)(v).
Having her client inform the PEO regarding her negligence
72(2)(a) and having the PEO discipline her.
Having the design carried out and the building collapse as a result
of her firm's incompetent design 72(2)(h).

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Law - Long Answer Questions


Now let's move over to the Law long answer questions. Once again, lets review
the question types that frequently appear on exams to focus our efforts.
Law Questions
Tort Law & Concurrent Tortfeasors
Equitable Estoppel
Tendering Contract A
Breach of Contract

# of times used
9
5
5
12

Tort Law & Concurrent Tortfeasors


For tort questions youre looking for 3 or more parties to be involved or for at
least two parties who are not in contract. As shown in the definition for tort
above, be ready to list the 3 requirements for tort in your solution. For
Concurrent Tortfeasors there will need to be more than one party that caused
damage, injury or loss. You may be asked to play the judge and split the
damages (e.g. 25% and 75%) for the tortfeasors.
For additional information on Tort Law, refer to Chapter 4 - Tort Liability in your
Law textbook.
Sample Question
An owner hired an environmental compliance firm, eFirm, to perform an
environmental audit on some of its properties so that the information could be
passed to the buyer. eFirm used a junior engineer and completed the audits and
submitted the reports with a disclaimer stating that eFirm accepts no
responsibility for damages suffered by a 3 rd party as a result of relying on the
audit information.
A few months later, the owner sold 2 of its properties to Buildings Inc. During the
sale the audit reports were shown to Buildings Inc. but there were no discussions
between Buildings Inc. and eFirm. eFirm was not even aware of the sale.
3 years later Buildings Inc. filed a lawsuit against eFirm claiming that hazardous
substances were found on one of the properties and that an independent
environmental consultant they hired determined that too little time was spent by
eFirm investigating the property for hazardous substances. Buildings Inc. is
suing for damages relating to the costs for abatement resulting from the negligent
misstatement in eFirms report.
What potential liabilities in tort law rise? In your answer, explain what principles
of tort law are relevant and how each applies to the case.
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Suggested Solution
Potential liabilities could arise for all of eFirm, the owner and Buildings Inc. The
principles of tort are:

Duty of care
Breach of that duty; and
Damages as a result of the breach

Tort exists to compensate the victim of the civil wrong. Tort exists in this instance
since there is no contract between eFirm and Buildings Inc. Since the owner and
Buildings Inc. have a contract, the owner could be liable in both tort and contract.
Building Inc will claim that eFirm should have done a more thorough job with the
investigation of hazardous substances as its duty of care. Since hazardous
materials were found and could have been avoided with proper investigation, that
duty was breached. Costs for the abatement of the materials (i.e. damages)
would be incurred as a result of the breach.
Buildings Inc. could be liable to pay for the damages themselves if eFirms
disclaimer is enforced in court.

Equitable Estoppel
This question deals with a party making a gratuitous promise (i.e. a promise
without consideration) and a legal principle call an equitable estoppel which
protects a party that has been put in an unfair position as a result of receiving a
gratuitous promise. This type of question can be identified when you have a
promise that is not updated in the contract. The promise, to change a deadline
for example, is usually made verbally in these questions. However it can also be
made silently. For example, if an owner is consistently making late payments to
the contractor, which is against the contract, but the contractor doesnt complain,
this can be constituted as a gratuitous promise.
For additional information on Equitable Estoppel, refer to Chapter 10 - Intent
(pages 92-97) in your Law textbook.
Sample Question
An Owner and Contractor enter into a contract to build an airplane hangar that is
to be finished by July 1. Halfway through the project the Owner decides she is
going on summer vacation and verbally tells the Contractor that he can finish by
September 1. On June 20th the Owner misses her flight and decides not to go
on vacation and demands the hangar to be built by their contract date of July 1 st.
The Contractor refuses since he did not plan to have the material/labour lined up
until September 1.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Was the Owner entitled to rely on the strict wording of the contract under these
circumstances? In giving reasons for your answers, identify and explain the
relevant legal principle and how it would apply.
Suggested Solution
The Owner was not entitled to rely on the strict wording of the contract. The
Contractor was extended a gratuitous promise from the Owner to extend the
delivery date. The contractor was clearly depending on the promise and would
be put at a loss if it had to revert back to the original contract. If the Owner
insisted on the wording of the contract, the Contractor could request an
equitable estoppel from the court. The court would likely enforce the estoppel
and revise the completion date to September 1 to make it equitable for the
Contractor.

Tendering Contract A
These questions deal with the tendering phase of a contract. Look out for
contractors who miscalculated their bids and want to find a way out. As you now
know from the Ron Engineering case, a Contract A is binding and is formed
when the owners offer is accepted by the bidder(s) upon the submission of each
compliant bid.
For additional information on Contract A, refer to Chapter 16 - Tendering Issues
- Contract A in your Law textbook.
Sample Question
PLAYCO, a supplier of playground equipment for restaurant chains, submitted a
fixed price bid on a major renovation project for a large restaurant chain, in
response to the chains request for proposal (RFP). PLACO included with the
tender, as required, a certified cheque for $50,000 payable to the chain as a
tender deposit.
The RFP clearly indicated that if the tender was accepted by the chain and the
successful bidder did not execute the contract enclosed with the RFP, the chain
would be entitled to retain the tender deposit for its own use and to accept any
other tender.
PLAYCO made a clerical error in compiling its tender submission, omitting
$500,000 from its tender price of $3,000,000. PLAYCO made the chain aware of
this error only 5 minutes after the official time for submitting bids had expired.
PLAYCO indicated that it wished to withdraw its tender but the chain refused to
allow it to do so and awarded the supply contract to PLAYCO.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Was PLAYCO entitled to withdraw its bid? Was the chain entitled to keep the
tender deposit? Provide your reasons and analysis, explaining the relationships
and indicate a likely outcome.
Suggested Solution
PLAYCO was not entitled to withdraw its bid since it entered into a Contract A
with the owner upon the submission of its compliant bid. Since the landmark Ron
Engineering case, courts have respected the contract that is formed with the
tendering phase.
The chain was entitled to keep the tender deposit as per the provision in the
contract that allows them to do since PLAYCO did not execute the contract.
In this question, PLAYCO made a unilateral mistake, meaning a mistake made
by only one party. The chain, when developing such a tender in the first place
needs to realize that if they make the contract too one sided, then some
contractors may refuse to bid or may submit higher prices. As the owner, the
chain needs to be aware of this but may draft the contract in any way so long as
they treat all bidder fairly.

Breach of Contract
A breach of contract occurs when a party fails to perform obligations specified in
the contract. Be careful not to confuse this with the Equitable Estoppel question
type. It will be a Breach of Contract Question when a party fails to deliver or
execute something and there was no verbal promise of extension, change, etc.
These questions will often ask for you to determine the damages that one party
will seek and may have a contract clause limiting liability. Thus, you should be
familiar with the case study on page 162-164 in your Law textbook. Review the
case study before trying the question below. Additionally, you should be aware
of the Hunter Engineering Company case study (page 159-162) which has
provided guidance to many court decisions that have since upheld clauses that
limit liability.
For additional information on Breach of Contract, refer to Chapter 19 - Breach of
Contract and Chapter 20 - Fundamental Breach in your Law textbook.
Sample Question
A telecommunications development company leased an outdated and unused
underground pipe system from an Ontario municipality. The developer's purpose
in leasing the pipe was to utilize it as an existing conduit system in which to
install a fibre optic cable system to be designed, constructed and operated in the
municipality by the telecommunications developer during the term of the lease.
All necessary approvals from regulatory authorities were obtained with respect to
the proposed telecommunications network.
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

The telecommunications development company then entered into an installation


contract with a contractor. For the contract price of $4,000,000, the contractor
undertook to complete the installation of the cable by a specified completion
date. The contract specified that time was of the essence and that the contract
was to be completed by the specified completion date, failing which the
contractor would be responsible for liquidated damages in the amount of $50,000
per day for each day that elapsed between the specified completion date and the
subsequent actual completion date. The contract also contained a provision
limiting the contractor's maximum liability for liquated damages and for any other
claim for damages under the contract to the maximum amount of $1,000,000.
Due to its failure to properly staff and organize its workforce, the contractor failed
to meet the specified completion date. In addition, during the installation, the
contractor's inexperienced workers damaged significant amounts of the fibre
optic cable, with the result that the telecommunications development company,
on subsequently discovering the damage, incurred substantial additional
expense in engaging another contractor to replace the damaged cable.
Ultimately, the cost of supplying and installing the replacement cable plus the
amount of liquidated damages for which the original contractor was responsible
because of its failure to meet the specified completion date, totaled $1,800,000.
Explain and discuss what claim the telecommunications development company
could make against the contractor in the circumstances. In answering, explain
the approach taken by Canadian courts with request to contracts that limit liability
and include a brief summary of the development of relevant case precedents.

Suggested Solution
The facts demonstrate a fundamental breach of contract. The
telecommunications company is seeking an amount totaling: supplying &
installing replacement cable + failure to meet deadline = $1,800,000.
The telecommunications company would be successful for seeking damages
because the guarantee of meeting the deadline was broken. However, since the
Hunter Engineering vs. Syncrude case, courts have upheld exemption clauses.
Thus, the contractor would only be required to pay $1,000,000 (the stipulated
maximum amount) assuming that the clause was clear and direct. The courts
scrutinizing the wording of the exemption clause is the legal principal known as
the true construction approach.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Practice Exam #1
Note: No aids are permitted other than Ontario Regulation 941 sections 72
(Appendix A in this guide) and section 77 (Appendix B).

Questions
Part A Professional Practice and Ethics
Question 1 (25 marks)
(10)

(a)

PEO performs enforcement as one of its functions. Briefly explain


what enforcement is and how it is different from discipline. List two
activities that are subject to enforcement.

(5)

(b)

The main object of PEO is to regulate the practice of professional


engineering and to govern its members. Briefly explain the other
additional objectives specified in the Act.

(5)

(c)

PEO issues Certificates of Authorization. Who or what is eligible to


receive one? Why it is necessary to obtain one?

(5)

(d)

PEO issues Temporary licenses. Other than paying the fee, briefly
state 3 other requirements to obtain such a licence.

Question 2 (25 marks)


Todd owns a house in the City of Oshawa, Ontario, and was recently notified by
the City that the foundation walls of his house are in violation of the Citys by-law
standards due to their visible deterioration. The City ordered Todd to obtain a
written report from a professional engineer regarding the walls condition. Todd
retained Paul, a licensed member of the PEO to prepare the report. Paul
performed an inspection and prepared a report stating that the walls appear to be
structurally sound and capable of safely sustaining the house for many more
years.
Todd then submitted Pauls report to the City. The City replied to Todd and
copied Paul pointing out that a recent City inspection showed deterioration of the
walls, evidence of water permeation and photos. The letter requested a
reassessment to be made within 2 weeks. Todd was unaware that Paul would
be waiting for authorization from him to spend more time on the project, so he did
not contact Paul and request him to respond. Paul did not follow up with either
the City or Todd.
After a second request to Todd, copied to Paul, Paul replied by letter to the City,
mentioning that he never examined the interior walls, only the exterior and

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

admitted that the photos provided did show that the foundation was in fact
structurally unsound.
(15)

(a)

Comment on the engineering services provided by Paul, in relation


to Regulation 941. In your response, also discuss Pauls conduct
regarding his dealings with the City.

(10)

(b)

Paul did not have a Certificate of Authorization. Does Paul need


one under the facts described above? Explain why or why not.
What are the possible consequences to a professional engineer of
acting without a CofA when one is required?

Question 3 (25 marks)


TurbCo is a company that manufactures turbines for power generating plants.
TurbCo recently signed a contract with PowerGen, an independent power
producer. According to the contract, TurbCo agreed to supply a turbine for a new
power plant owned by PowerGen. TurbCo guaranteed that the turbine would
produce electricity at a rate of 100 megawatts. In addition to supplying the
turbine, TurbCo's contractual responsibilities included providing technical advice
and on-site support during the start-up, testing and commissioning of the turbine.
PowerGen hired MechCon, a separate construction contractor, to construct the
power plant including installing the turbine supplied by TurbCo. To commission
the plant the contractor, MechCon ran a number of test to make sure that the
turbine was working properly and producing the power at the guaranteed rate.
TurbCo sent one of its employees, M.Ployee, to the site to witness the tests and
to provide technical advice to assist MechCon during the testing. M.Ployee is a
very experienced professional engineer and has worked on many different
construction sites over the years. Soon after arriving at the site, it became
apparent to M.Ployee that MechCon was carrying out its work in an unsafe
manner. Many of MechCon's workers were working without hardhats, eye
protection or safety shoes. In fact, M.Ployee learned that MechCon had not
established any safety procedures for its crew.
During the testing by MechCon, M.Ployee noticed that MechCon's personnel did
not conduct the test in complete compliance with the official testing procedures
that were established for the project. According to the test that were actually
carried out, it seemed that the turbine achieved the guaranteed rate of
performance. However, the turbine did not produce the guaranteed amount of
power. M.Ployee knew that if the tests had been conducted properly, it would
have revealed the turbine's deficient power output. M.Ployee was concerned that
TurbCo would be required under its contract to pay PowerGen liquidated
damages as a result of the power deficiency. M.Ployee did not say anything to
anyone about the improper testing procedure. No one else noticed that the tests
were not performed properly.
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

(15)

(a)

What, if any, duties does M.Ployee have under the code of ethics
and the definition of professional misconduct regarding the potential
dangers to MecCon's workers? Explain whether it matters to
M.Ployee's duties that the unsafe practices involved work that was
not relevant to the services that TurbCo was hired to perform.

(10)

(b)

Comment on M.Ployee's obligations, if any, under the code of


ethics and the definitions of professional misconduct regarding the
test procedure and the failure of the turbine to perform at the
guaranteed rate. Important: in your answer assume that the
improper testing and deficient power output create no safety risks or
other dangerous situation.

Question 4 (25 marks)


Dave, P.Eng. is an independent practitioner, was engaged by Eng Inc. an
engineering firm to perform conceptual design and prepare drawings for a fully
automated high-temperature and low-pressure reactor system in accordance with
the existing safety regulations. Upon completion of the work, Dave affixed his
seal with his signature and date on the original drawings and the drawings were
turned over to the project manager of Eng Inc (a P.Eng.).
David was later retained to inspect the fabricated reactor facility and found that
many crucial aspects of the design had been ignored.
(25)

Discuss the situation, including Daves actions and professional


responsibility. What steps should Dave take now?

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Part B Engineering Law and Professional Liability


Question 1 (25 marks) Briefly define, explain or answer (by listing as required)
any five of the following:
(i)

Liquidated damages

(ii)

Dispute resolution board

(iii)

Fraudulent misrepresentation

(iv)

Rule of contra proferentem

(v)

Secret commission

(vi)

Limitation period

(vii)

True construction approach

(viii)

Five examples of employment rights to which individuals are entitled


under Ontarios Human Rights Code (list only)

Question 2 (25 marks)


Provincial Life of Ontario Inc. ("Provincial"), an insurance company, retained an
architect to design a new corporate head office in New York, Ontario. Provincial,
as client, and the architect entered into a written client/architect agreement in
connection with the project. According to the agreement, the architect was to
prepare the complete architectural and engineering design for the project.
In order to carry out the structural engineering aspects of the design, the
architect engaged the services of a structural engineering firm. The architect and
the structural engineering firm entered into a separate agreement to which
Provincial was not a party.
To determine the nature of soil on which the project would be constructed, two
shallow test pits, each about 1.25 meters deep, were dug on the site at locations
selected by the architect. The architect telephoned the structural engineering
firm's vice-president and request that the firm send out a professional engineer to
examine the soils exposed in the test pit.
Based on the information received from the professional engineer sent to
examine the soil, the vice-president (a P. Eng) of the structural engineering firm
reported to the architect that the test pits had revealed a silty clay. The vicepresident also recommended to the architect that a soils engineer be engaged to
carry out more thorough and proper soils tests. The architect rejected the
recommendation stating that there was not "enough room in the budget" for more
soils test.
The architect succeeded in persuading he vice-president to send a letter to
Provincial giving a "soils report" based on the examination of the shallow test
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

pits. The vice-president stated in a letter to Provincial, that based on its


examination of the test pits, the soil was a fairly uniform mixture of clay and silt
which would be able to support loads up to a maximum of 100 kPa.
The structural engineering firm then completed its structural engineering design
on the basis of the maximum soil load reported to Provincial.
The project was constructed in accordance wit the plans and specifications.
Subsequently, the building suffered extensive structural change, including
severely cracked and uneven floors and walls.
On the basis of an independent engineering investigation by an engineer
retained by Provincial, it was determined that the extensive structural change in
the building had resulted from the substantial and uneven settlement of the
building. The investigation also determined that the subsoil in the area of the
building consisted of 30 to 40 meters of compressible marine clay covered by a
surface layer of dryer and firmer clay two meters in depth. The investigation also
revealed that the test pits that were dug had not penetrated the surface layer into
the lower layer of compressible material.
What liabilities in tort law arise from the preceding set of facts? In your answer,
explain the purpose of tort law and identify what essential principles of tort law
are relevant. Apply each principle to the facts. Indicate a likely outcome of the
matter.

Question 3 (25 marks)


The Owner (an Ontario municipality) decided to renew and expand its water
treatment facilities. As a result, the Owner invited competitive tenders from
contractors for the construction of a new water treatment facility. The facility was
designed by a professional engineer who was hired by the Owner to act as a
consultant. The engineer prepared tender documents and then gave them to
contractors that were already prequalified by the Owner. The tender documents
included:

Plans and Specifications


Tendering Instructions
Tender Form
Other documents

According to the Tendering Instructions, each bid as submitted was to remain


firm and irrevocable and open for acceptance by the Owner for a period of 60
days following the tender closing date. The Tendering Instructions also noted
that the Owner was not obligated to accept the lowest or any of the compliant
bids.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Tenders were submitted by 5 bidders. All bids were considered to be compliant


with the tender documents. The lowest bid was well within the Owners budget.
Within the 60 day timeframe and before the Owners consultant had made a
recommendation, the consultant was called into a meeting with a highly ranked
member of the Municipal Council who mentioned that the lowest bidder was not a
local bidder from within the Municipality. The council member emphasized his
view that the contract should be awarded to a local bidder. He also pointed out
that had one requirement have been deleted from the specifications, the bid
award would be going to the lowest local contractor which was preferred by the
councilor.
There was no clause or reference in the Tendering Instruction to any preference
being shown to local contractors.
(a)[10] How should the consultant deal with the political pressure being applied
by the Council member?
(b)[15] If the contract is awarded to the lowest local bidder what potential
liabilities in contract law may arise? If the consultant engineer
recommends to the Owner that the contract be awarded as the Councilor
suggests what liabilities may arise for the engineer? Provide reasons
and analysis.

Question 4 (25 marks)


An information technology (IT) firm submitted a bid to design software and
hardware for an electronic technology process to control the operation of a largescale baggage handling and related security facility for a major airline.
The firms fixed guaranteed maximum price was the lowest bid and the contract
was awarded to it. The contract conditions entitled the information technology
firm to terminate the contract if the airline did not pay monthly progress payment
within 15 days following certification that a progress payment was due. Pursuant
to the contract, an independent engineering firm engaged as contract
administrator carried out the certification.
The contract work was to be performed over an 8-month period. After
commencing work on the project the IT firm determined that it had made
significant judgment errors in arriving at its bid price and it would face a major
loss on the project. Its concerns were heightened after learning how much lower
they were than the other bides and realizing that it left more than 1 million dollars
on the table.
The project started off smoothly as the first 3 monthly progress payments were
certified as due by the independent engineering firm and paid by the airline in
accordance with the terms of the contract. However, after the forth monthly
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

progress payment was certified as due by the independent engineering firm, the
airlines finance department asked the IT firm's representative on the project for
information pertaining to an invoice from a subcontractor to the IT firm. The
subcontractors invoice comprised a portion of the forth progress payment
amount. The airlines finance department requested that the additional
information be provided prior to payment of the 4th progress payment.
The signed contract between the firm and the airline did not obligate the IT firm to
provide the addition information requested, however the representative from the
IT firm did verbally indicate that the additional information would be provided.
The IT firm never proved the additional information relating to the subcontractors
invoice. 16 days after the 4th progress payment had been certified for payment,
the IT firm notified the airline in writing that it was terminating the contract
because the airline was in default for not honouring its obligations to make
payment within 15 days pursuant to the express wording of the contract.
[25]

Was the IT firm entitled to terminate the contract in these


circumstances?
In giving reasons for your answer, identify and explain the relevant
legal principle, its purpose, how it arises, and how it would apply to
the facts.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Note: Be sure to answer the above questions on your own before reading the
solutions on the following pages.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Solutions to Practice Exam #1


Part A Professional Practice and Ethics
Question 1 - Answers (25 marks)
(a)

Enforcement is prosecuting individuals or entities who practice


engineering without a licence, or offer engineering services to the
public without holding a Certificate of Authorization. This is
different from discipline which reprimands, suspends or expels
members who are guilty of professional misconduct.
Two activities subject to enforcement is: using a seal to mislead
others; use the title professional engineer or P.Eng to mislead.

(b)

Other objectives include:

(c)

Establish, maintain and develop standards of:


knowledge and skills among its members;
qualifications;
profession ethics
Promote public awareness of role of the Association

A CofA can be issued to a person, partnership or a corporation.


The requirements include:

(d)

The applicant must designate a professional engineer who


is an employee or partner in the firm to assume
professional responsibility for the services provided.
The designated engineer must have 5+ years of
professional engineering experience beyond university.
Carry professional liability insurance OR disclose to every
client that they dont have it and obtain written
acknowledgement of this disclosure.

Licensed in another province/territory; Qualified to work on a


specific project and are familiar with the applicable codes,
standards and laws; Collaborate with a member of the local
Association (this may waived if the applicant is highly qualified).

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Question 2 - Answers (25 marks)


(a)

Pauls report overlooked the condition of the interior walls which


shows negligence 72(2)(a) since this level of care would be
reasonably expected by an engineer undertaking his role. Paul
showed a lack of competence in performing his duty 77(1)(v). In
Pauls dealings with the City, he failed to cooperate with other
practitioners 77(6) and by waiting for authorization he failed his
duty to make public welfare paramount 77(2)(i) as well as didnt
show fairness to his client 77(1)(i). Since the foundation was
deteriorating, Paul failed to ensure that the building met the
applicable building codes 72(2)(d).

(b)

Yes, Paul needs a CofA since he is offering his services to the


public. Under section 40(1) of the Professional Engineers Act,
fines for offering services to the public without a CofA are
$25,000 for a first offence and $50,000 for each subsequent
offence.

Question 3 - Answers (25 marks)


(a)

Workplace safety is the responsibility of everyone. M.Ployee does


have an obligation to safeguard the life and health of the work
crew 72(2)(b). He has a duty to clearly present the
consequences of not using safety equipment and procedures
72(2)(f). M.Ployee should keep the information of his employers
confidential 77(3), however if MechCon does not cooperate, he
has a greater responsibility to report a situation that may
endanger the safety of others 72(2)(c) without fear of favour
77(8). Furthermore, M.Ployee must regard the public (i.e. work
crew) welfare as paramount 77(2)(i) and must co-operate with his
fellow professional 77(6) to quickly resolve the situation.

(b)

Even though the testing does not put the public at risk, M.Ployee
still has an ethical obligation to his client to treat them fairly
77(1)(i) as well as maintain a devotion to personal integrity
77(1)(iii). Although liquidated damages may result for TurbCo for
not meeting its performance targets, if PowerGen were to later
find out that M.Ployee knew that the tests were done incorrectly it
may permanently damage the working relationship between itself
and TurbCo.

Question 4 - Answers (25 marks)


Unless stipulated under his contract, Dave should not have given
up his original drawings. A drawing should be stamped or
sealed if it is a copy, to ensure proper practices are maintained
72(2)(a), 72(2)(k). Dave should immediately contact the
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

appropriate person(s) at Eng Inc. to inform them that many of the


design aspects have been overlooked.
If Eng Inc. does not take swift action to make corrections to the
reactor to ensure public safety 72(2)(b) and comply with
regulations and codes 72(2)(d), Dave should waive his right to
keep secret any confidential information about the project 77(3)
by reporting the situation which might endanger the public
72(2)(c). This reporting should be in writing and should be
issues to Daves legal counsel, PEO and his insurance company.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Part B Engineering Law and Professional Liability


Question 1 - Answers (25 marks)
Note you will pick just 5 to answer but we have included all solutions for your
reference.
(i)

Liquidated damages - A contract clause used to minimize risks


associated with performance. Liquidated damages are preestimates of the damages that may result from a non-performance
under the contract.

(ii)

Dispute resolution board (DRB) - A DRB is a form of project-based


dispute resolution where the persons on the board (usually 3)
recommend or decide on solutions to disputes thought the course of
the projects.

(iii)

Fraudulent misrepresentation - A misrepresentation is an untrue


statement or assertion of fact. It is fraudulent when the party
knowingly or recklessly uses it to induce another party to enter into a
contract. The misled party is usually entitled to the following:
rescind the contract, claim compensation for costs incurred as a
result of entering into the contract, and sue for damages for deceit.

(iv)

Rule of contra proferentem - A contract term that is ambiguous will


be interpreted against the party that drafted that provision.

(v)

Secret commission - Giving or receiving a bribe or kickback to show


favour or disfavour to a person or company.

(vi)

Limitation period - A window of time when a claim can be made for


injury or loss. The beginning of the period is from when the action
was discovered or ought to have reasonably been discovered.

(vii)

True construction approach - An exemption clause (which is a


contract provision used to limit liability or protect a party from being
sued) will be scrutinized by a strict construction of its wording. If the
clause is clear and direct it will be upheld unless it is
unconscionable. Looking at the wording of the clause is said to be
the true construction test or approach.

(viii)

Five examples of employment rights to which individuals are entitled


under Ontarios Human Rights Code (list only) - Choose any 5 of the
following: Race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin,
citizenship, creed, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family
status, record of offences, or handicap.

Question 2 - Answers (25 marks)


The liabilities arising in tort are a result from the structural damage
that was caused by the negligence of the architect and the
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

engineering firm. Tort law is designed to compensate a party that


suffers a loss from a civil wrong.
All 3 principles of tort apply:

Duty of care soil test should have been carried out by a soils
engineer who has the experience to identify potential issues
Breach of duty the duty of care was confirmed breached by the
independent engineering investigator who determined that the
settlement of the building was a result of poor soil testing practices
Loss from the breach extensive structural damage to the building
occurred as a result of the construction going ahead as per the
plans and specifications
Since the architect refused to pay for more comprehensive testing, it
is at fault. The architect was also at fault for selecting the test pits
rather than having a qualified engineer select them. The
engineering firm is at fault for not selecting the test pits and for not
sending a soils engineer to examine the soil.
Since both parties are at fault they are said to be concurrent
tortfeasors. The engineering firm would be likely be held vicariously
liable for the actions of the P.Eng. (vice-president).
In order to compensate Provincial, a likely outcome of the
responsibility would be for the architect to pay for 40% and the
engineering firm to pay for 60% of the damages.

Question 3 - Answers (25 marks)


(a)

The consultant should stand up to the Council member and politely


decline his invitation to break the law. He should inform the
Councilor that when contractors submit their bids they form a
Contract A with the municipality which is legally binding.

(b)

If the contract is awarded to the lowest local bidder the potential


liability in contract law that may arise is breach of Contract A. The
other 4 bidders may sue the municipality for not treating all bidders
fairly and equally. The contractors would sue for breach claiming
for bid expenses, lost profits as well as legal fees. If the consultant,
who is a P.Eng, recommends the lowest local bidder they could be
disciplined for showing favour to a party that was inspired by others,
in addition to breaking contract law.

Question 4 - Answers (25 marks)


The IT firm was not entitled to terminate the contract under these
circumstances. The employee of the IT firm extended a gratuitous
promise to the airline by verbally indicating that more information
Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

would be provided. Since the promise was not amended in the


contract and because consideration (e.g. money) was not
exchanged, it is a gratuitous promise. The IT firm was simply using
the late payment as a way of escaping their contract.
If the IT firm took the airline to court on the strict wording of the
contract, the court would see that the promise made by the IT firm
was being relied on and terminating the contract would result in an
inequitable result for the airline. Thus, the court would likely enforce
an equitable estoppel which would prevent the IT firm from relying
on the strict wording of the contract.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Next Steps
Wow! Im impressed - you made it to the end. Most people dont they get
distracted, they go play X-Box and end up sweating in the exam. Luckily,
youre one of the smart ones that knows that it pays to finish what you started.
I hope you give your full effort on the exam and ensure that answer each
question to the best of your ability so the exam reviewer can say yes this
person really gets it.
After writing the PPE:
After you write your exam, you can finally breathe a sigh of relief that your
studying is over. What's next? Your results will arrive in 8-10 weeks.
If you were unsuccessful at your PPE, study the materials presented above
again and ensure that you:
o know the definitions/concepts
o be able to identify and answer the different types of long answer
questions
o pace yourself in the exam
o write clearly and legibly in proper English.
If you have passed - congratulations. You've moved one step closer to your
P.Eng.

Thank you for your attention!


I really hope that this eBook has made your studying clearer and perhaps a
little more fun, even though the material can be a little dull. I would really
appreciate if you can let me know what you think of this guide. You can
leave me your feedback as a public review/comment on our Facebook Fan
Page (preferred) or by sending me a private comment through our website.
Your next step in your P.Eng. journey will be to work on your Engineering
Experience Record. This extensive writing process can be very
intimidating to many aspiring engineers like myself who took engineering to
avoid writing. Dont worry we have products and services to help you out
that youll find them just as useful as this guide was for your PPE.
Thank you again and I wish you all the best in your engineering career!

Gavin Simone, P.Eng.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Top National Employers That Hire Aspiring Engineers


Aspiring engineers on the path to a professional engineering designation have
many options when it comes to choosing an employer. Perhaps you love your
job and aren't considering a new career. Others may be looking for an
opportunity to do something different or for someone else in the near future. If
that sounds like you, we've compiled a list of top employers, many having a
number of offices across Canada. Here they are in alphabetical order:

1. Company: 3M Canada Company


# of Canadian offices: 11
Types of engineers they hire: Chemical, Software, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Defined contributions pension plan,
subsidies for tuition, generous maternity leave, and unique head office. For
more information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-3m-canada-company
Link to open position: http://www.3m.com/cms/ca/en/1-30/criRuFO/view.html

2. Company: Aecon Group Inc.


# of Canadian offices: 16
Types of engineers they hire: Geotechnical, Environmental, Mechanical,
Civil, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Ownership culture with a share purchase
plan, great financial benefits, subsidies for job-related courses, in-house and
online training programs, academic scholarship program for children of
employees, and maternity leave top-up payments. For more information
regarding why they are a top employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employeraecon-group
Link to open position: http://www.aecon.com/Careers/View_Jobs

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

3. Company: Bombardier Inc.


# of Canadian offices: 8
Types of engineers they hire: Mechanical, Electrical, Software, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Alternative working arrangements,
employee development, paid internship opportunities, paid vacation, in-house
and online training programs, and paid internship opportunities. For more
information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-bombardier
Link to open position: http://careers.bombardier.com/home

4. Company: Canadian Security Intelligence Service


# of Canadian offices: 6
Types of engineers they hire: Electrical, Electronics, Computer, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Excellent parental leave, 3 weeks
vacation to start, offices with fitness classes, academic scholarship program for
children of employees, and retirement planning. For more information
regarding why they are a top employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employercanadian-security-intelligence-service
Link to open position: http://jobs-emplois.gc.ca/index-eng.htm

5. Company: EllisDon Corporation


# of Canadian offices: 11
Types of engineers they hire: Civil, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Profit-sharing, share purchase plans,
discounted accommodation packages, parental leave top-up payments,
retirement planning assistance, career planning services, and extended health
benefit coverage. For more information regarding why they are a top employer,
visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-ellisdon
Link to open position: http://www.ellisdon.com/careers

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

6. Company: Enbridge Inc.


# of Canadian offices: 8
Types of engineers they hire: Chemical, Civil, Electrical, Industrial,
Mechanical, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Vacation and time-off programs, financial
rewards, parents maternity top payments, ongoing development of employees,
extensive in-house training program, and retirement planning assistance. For
more information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-enbridge
Link to open position: http://jobs.enbridge.com/careers/engineering-jobs

7. Company: Golder Associates Ltd


# of Canadian offices: 47
Types of engineers they hire: Civil, Geotechnical, Mechanical,
Mining/Metals, other
Reasons they are a top employer: International employee exchange
program, retirement planning assistance, health benefits plan, financial
rewards, employee volunteer program, extensive in-house training program,
onsite amenities and retirement planning assistance. For more information
regarding why they are a top employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employergolder
Link to open position: http://careers.golder.com/content/location/

8. Company: Knight Pisold Ltd


# of Canadian offices: 2
Types of engineers they hire: Civil, Environmental, Geotechnical,
Mechanical, Other
Reasons they are a top employer: Profit-sharing, year-end bonuses, jobrelated courses, contribution pension plan, parental leave top-up payments,
and phased-in work options. For more information regarding why they are a
top employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-knight-piesold
Link to open position:
http://www.knightpiesold.com/en/index.cfm/careers/career-opportunities/

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

9. Company: Ledcor Group of Companies


# of Canadian offices: 5
Types of engineers they hire: Civil, Mechanical, Software, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Financial benefits, multiple employee-led
green teams, encourages ongoing employee development, alternative work
arrangements, maternity leave top-up payments, and flexible hours. For more
information regarding why they are a top employer http://www.eluta.ca/topemployer-ledcor-industries
Link to open position: http://www.ledcor.com/careers

10. Company: National Energy Board


# of Canadian offices: 1
Types of engineers they hire: Chemical, Mechanical
Reasons they are a top employer: Maternity and parental leave top-up
payments, employee development, alternative work arrangements, on-site
amenities, formal earned days-off program, and work-related courses. For
more information regarding why they are a top employer
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-national-energy-board
Link to open position: http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/clf-nsi/rthnb/crr/crrpprtntseng.html

11. Company: OpenText Corporation


# of Canadian offices: 7
Types of engineers they hire: Software, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Vacation allowance, alternative work
arrangements, maternity leave top-up payments, tuition subsidies, online skills
inventory, financial rewards, referral bonuses, and referral bonuses. For more
information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-open-text
Link to open position: http://www.opentext.com/2/global/company/companycareers/company-careers-jobs/company-careers-jobs-global.htm

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

12. Company: PCL Constructors Inc.


# of Canadian offices: 11
Types of engineers they hire: Civil, Mechanical, Construction, Infrastructure,
other
Reasons they are a top employer: Maternity leave top-up payments, profit
sharing and a share purchase plan, financial rewards, ongoing employee
development, and compassionate leave top-up payments. For more
information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-pcl
Link to open position: http://www.pcl.com/careers/Pages/SearchCareers.aspx

13. Company: Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan


# of Canadian offices: 6
Types of engineers they hire: Civil, Mechanical, Mining, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Maternity leave top-up payments, paid
vacation allowance, employee development, academic scholarship program,
in-house training programs, and career planning services. For more
information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-potash-corporation-of-saskatchewan
Link to open position: http://www.potashcorp.com/careers/

14. Company: Rescan Environmental Services Ltd


# of Canadian offices: 10
Types of engineers they hire: Environmental, Geotechnical, other
Reasons they are a top employer: 3-weeks paid vacation to start, employee
development, financial bonuses, generous year-end bonuses, maternity leave
top-up payments, balance their professional and personal lives through
telecommuting and shortened work week. For more information regarding why
they are a top employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-rescanenvironmental-services
Link to open position: http://www.rescan.com/career_opportunities.php

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

15. Company: Shaw Communications Inc.


# of Canadian offices: 12+
Types of engineers they hire: Computer, Electrical, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Profit-sharing, subsidies for employee
development, defined benefit pension plan, generous parental leave,
encourages work-life balance through flexible hours and reduced summer
hours. For more information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-shaw-communications
Link to open position: http://www.shaw.ca/corporate/careers/

16. Company: Shell Canada Limited


# of Canadian offices: 10+
Types of engineers they hire: Chemical, Mechanical, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Tuition subsidies, formal mentoring,
retirement planning, defined benefit pension plan, year-end bonuses, support
800 charitable initiatives, and 3 paid volunteer days per year. For more
information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-shell-canada
Link to open position: http://www.shell.ca/en/aboutshell/careers-tpkg.html

17. Company: Stryker Canada Inc.


# of Canadian offices: 3
Types of engineers they hire: Electrical, Electronic, Telecommunications,
Mechanical, Software, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Share purchase plan, year-end
performance bonuses, employee referral bonuses, flexible work hours for staff,
top-up payments for parental leave, and employee professional development
subsides. For more information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-stryker-canada
Link to open position: http://www.stryker-careers.com/search?q=canada

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

18. Company: Suncor Energy Inc.


# of Canadian offices: 7+
Types of engineers they hire: Chemical, Electrical / Instrumentation,
Mechanical, Petroleum, other.
Reasons they are a top employer: Grew by over 1000 full time positions in
2011, onsite daycare, tuition subsidies, scholarships for children of employees,
flexible work arrangements, and profit sharing. For more information regarding
why they are a top employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-suncor
Link to open position: http://www.suncor.com/en/careers/4962.aspx

19. Company: Technip Canada Limited


# of Canadian offices: 2+
Types of engineers they hire: Mechanical, Civil, Ocean Engineering, other.
Reasons they are a top employer: Share purchase plan, maternity and
parental leave top-up payments, alternative working arrangements, and tuition
subsidies for work-related courses. For more information regarding why they
are a top employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-technip-canada
Link to open position: http://www.technip.com/en/careers/availablepositions/locations/12

20. Company: Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada Inc.


# of Canadian offices: 2
Types of engineers they hire: Mechanical, Electrical, Mechatronics,
Metallurgical, Chemical, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Signing bonuses, year-end bonuses, card
discounts, generous maternity/parental leave, unique head office amenities,
subsidized cafeterias, and retirement planning assistance. For more
information regarding why they are a top employer, visit:
http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-toyota-canada
Link to open position: http://www.tmmc.ca/en/administrative-engineeringroles.html

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

21. Company: Trican Well Service Ltd.


# of Canadian offices: 17
Types of engineers they hire: Petroleum, Mechanical, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Top-up payment for maternity/parental
leave, subsidies for professional accreditation, profit-sharing, share purchase
plan, matching RSP and retirement planning assistance. For more information
regarding why they are a top employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employertrican
Link to open position: http://www.trican.ca/careers/Default.aspx

22. Company: Union Gas Limited


# of Canadian offices: 14
Types of engineers they hire: Chemical, Civil, Mechanical, Metallurgical,
Materials, other.
Reasons they are a top employer: Signing bonuses, year-end bonuses,
share purchase plan, academic scholarship program for children of employees,
3-weeks paid vacation to start, retirement planning assistance, matching RSP
contributions, supports a number of charities and participates in a number of
environmental initiatives. For more information regarding why they are a top
employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-union-gas
Link to open position: http://www.uniongas.com/careers/index.asp

23. Company: West Fraser Timber Co. Ltd.


# of Canadian offices: 13
Types of engineers they hire: Chemical, other
Reasons they are a top employer: Share purchase plan, tuition subsidies,
scholarship program for children of employees, top-up payments for maternity
leave, and retirement planning assistance. For more information regarding why
they are a top employer, visit: http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-west-frasertimber-co
Link to open position: http://www.westfraser.com/jobs/index.asp

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Appendix A - Section 72 (Professional Misconduct)


(source 1990 Ontario Regulation 941)

72. (1) In this section,


harassment means engaging in a course of
vexatious comment or conduct that is known or
ought reasonably to be known as unwelcome and
that might reasonably be regarded as interfering
in a professional engineering relationship;
negligence means an act or an omission in the
carrying out of the work of a practitioner that
constitutes a failure to maintain the standards
that a reasonable and prudent practitioner would
maintain in the circumstances. R.R.O. 1990, Reg.
941, s. 72 (1); O. Reg. 657/00, s. 1 (1).
(2) For the purposes of the Act and this
Regulation,
professional misconduct means,
(a) negligence,
(b) failure to make reasonable provision for the
safeguarding of life, health or property of a
person who may be affected by the work for
which the practitioner is responsible,
(c) failure to act to correct or report a situation
that the practitioner believes may endanger the
safety or the welfare of the public,
(d) failure to make responsible provision for
complying with applicable statutes, regulations,
standards, codes, by-laws and rules in connection
with work being undertaken by or under the
responsibility of the practitioner,
(e) signing or sealing a final drawing,
specification, plan, report or other document not
actually prepared or checked by the practitioner,
(f) failure of a practitioner to present clearly to
the practitioners employer the consequences to
be expected from a deviation proposed in work,
if the professional engineering judgment of the
practitioner is overruled by non-technical
authority in cases where the practitioner is
responsible for the technical adequacy of
professional engineering work,
(g) breach of the Act or regulations, other than an
action that is solely a breach of the code of
ethics,
(h) undertaking work the practitioner is not
competent to perform by virtue of the
practitioners training and experience,

(i) failure to make prompt, voluntary and


complete disclosure of an interest, direct or
indirect, that might in any way be, or be
construed as, prejudicial to the professional
judgment of the practitioner in rendering service
to the public, to an employer or to a client, and in
particular, without limiting the generality of the
foregoing, carrying out any of the following acts
without making such a prior disclosure:
1. Accepting compensation in any form for a
particular service from more than one party.
2. Submitting a tender or acting as a contractor in
respect of work upon which the practitioner
may be performing as a professional
engineer.
3. Participating in the supply of material or
equipment to be used by the employer or
client of the practitioner.
4. Contracting in the practitioners own right to
perform professional engineering services for
other than the practitioners employer.
5. Expressing opinions or making statements
concerning matters within the practice of
professional engineering of public interest
where the opinions or statements are inspired
or paid for by other interests,
(j) conduct or an act relevant to the practice of
professional engineering that, having regard to
all the circumstances, would reasonably be
regarded by the engineering profession as
disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional,
(k) failure by a practitioner to abide by the terms,
conditions or limitations of the practitioners
licence, provisional licence, limited licence,
temporary licence or certificate,
(l) failure to supply documents or information
requested by an investigator acting under section
33 of the Act,
(m) permitting, counselling or assisting a person
who is not a practitioner to engage in the practice
of professional engineering except as provided
for in the Act or the regulations,
(n) harassment. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 941, s. 72 (2);
O. Reg. 657/00, s. 1 (2); O. Reg. 13/03, s. 19.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

Appendix B - Section 77 (Code of Ethics)


(source 1990 Ontario Regulation 941)

77. The following is the Code of Ethics of the


Association:
1. It is the duty of a practitioner to the public, to
the practitioners employer, to the practitioners
clients, to other members of the practitioners
profession, and to the practitioner to act at all
times with,
i. fairness and loyalty to the practitioners
associates, employers, clients, subordinates and
employees,
ii. fidelity to public needs,
iii. devotion to high ideals of personal honour
and professional integrity,
iv. knowledge of developments in the area of
professional engineering relevant to any
services that are undertaken, and
v. competence in the performance of any
professional engineering services that are
undertaken.
2. A practitioner shall,
i. regard the practitioners duty to public welfare
as paramount,
ii. endeavour at all times to enhance the public
regard for the practitioners profession by
extending the public knowledge thereof and
discouraging untrue, unfair or exaggerated
statements with respect to professional
engineering,
iii. not express publicly, or while the practitioner
is serving as a witness before a court,
commission or other tribunal, opinions on
professional engineering matters that are not
founded on adequate knowledge and honest
conviction,
iv. endeavour to keep the practitioners licence,
temporary licence, provisional licence,
limited licence or certificate of authorization,
as the case may be, permanently displayed in
the practitioners place of business.
3. A practitioner shall act in professional
engineering matters for each employer as a
faithful agent or trustee and shall regard as
confidential information obtained by the
practitioner as to the business affairs, technical
methods or processes of an employer and avoid
or disclose a conflict of interest that might
influence the practitioners actions or judgment.
4. A practitioner must disclose immediately to
the practitioners client any interest, direct or
indirect, that might be construed as prejudicial in

any way to the professional judgment of the


practitioner in rendering service to the client.
5. A practitioner who is an employee-engineer
and is contracting in the practitioners own name
to perform professional engineering work for
other than the practitioners employer, must
provide the practitioners client with a written
statement of the nature of the practitioners status
as an employee and the attendant limitations on
the practitioners services to the client, must
satisfy the practitioner that the work will not
conflict with the practitioners duty to the
practitioners employer, and must inform the
practitioners employer of the work.
6. A practitioner must co-operate in working
with other professionals engaged on a project.
7. A practitioner shall,
i. act towards other practitioners with courtesy
and good faith,
ii. not accept an engagement to review the work
of another practitioner for the same employer
except with the knowledge of the other
practitioner or except where the connection
of the other practitioner with the work has
been terminated,
iii. not maliciously injure the reputation or
business of another practitioner,
iv. not attempt to gain an advantage over other
practitioners by paying or accepting a
commission in securing professional
engineering work, and
v. give proper credit for engineering work,
uphold the principle of adequate
compensation for engineering work, provide
opportunity for professional development and
advancement of the practitioners associates
and subordinates, and extend the
effectiveness of the profession through the
interchange of engineering information and
experience.
8. A practitioner shall maintain the honour and
integrity of the practitioners profession and
without fear or favour expose before the proper
tribunals unprofessional, dishonest or unethical
conduct by any other practitioner. R.R.O. 1990,
Reg. 941, s. 77; O. Reg. 48/92, s. 1; O. Reg.
13/03, s. 21.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

PPE Cheat Sheet


Exam - Syllabus & Scope
Part A: Ethics
Terms/Concepts (reading location in brackets)
Definition of professional engineering (E13-17), principal object of PEO
(PE Act - Section 2(3-4)), enforcement and its penalties (E53, 63-4),
requirements of and responsibilities for each of the 4 licences (E412,
PEO Website left navigation bar), Consulting Engineer (E51, 111),
Certificate of Authorization (C of A) (PEO Website), liability insurance
(E114,130), complaints against licence holders and consequent discipline
(E52-53, 68-69), use of the engineer's seal (E97-99 & PEO Site), fees
mediation (PE Act - Section 32), conflict of interest (E231-252,265, 2856), work for other than employer (E239,246), advertising (E247, 282),
code of misconduct (R9 - section 72), code of ethics (R9 - section 77), a
breach of ethics is not misconduct (R9 - Section 72.2.g).
Typical Long Answers Question Type:
1. Ethical Obligations
2. Conflict of Interest
3. Moonlighting
4. Non-qualified workers
Use Codes 72 and 77 (supplied at exam) to support your long answer
arguments. The PPE Guide to Passing shows you exactly how to apply
the codes in your answer. Sorry, no room to explain here

Part B (Law)
Terms/Concepts (reading location in brackets)
Canadian legal system structure (L3-7), basics of business
organizations (L11-23); application of tort law principles in determining
liability for negligence (L37-51); limitation periods (L71-6); essential
elements and principles of contract law including grounds upon which a
contract may be impeached (L79-120); tendering issues (L121-134),
interpretation (L135-9), discharge and breach of contracts (L141-164);
contracts limiting liability (L168-9); engineering and other specific types of
contracts (L191-3); the Professional Engineers Act regulatory aspects (PE
Act - Section 7); construction lien legislation (L249-260); Competition Act
issues of relevance to engineers (L261-5); industrial property protection
(L281-293, E168-177); employment laws (L315-326); Human Rights Code
Prohibitions against Discrimination and Sexual Harassment (L322-3).
Typical Long Answers Question Type:
1. Tort Law
2. Equitable Estoppel
3. Tendering Contract A 4. Breach of Contract

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.

PPE Cheat Sheet Page 2

Exam - Specifics

ONT.PPECheatSheet-pg.2

Short Answer Strategy

What to Bring
1 piece of photo ID
Ethics - Typically you are asked to define, explain or answer 4-6
PEO member #
terms. ShortAnswerStrategy
be
Evh
i
cu
Ty
pi
c
a
l
l
y
y
ota
q
ea
uk
edvodef
i
ne,
ex
pl
a
i
noq
a
6veq
mu.
WhattoBring
3 or more
ballpoint pens

Law - You will


asked
to
define,
explain
or
answer
5nus
ofeq
84
terms.
La
s
Yots i
l
l
bea
uk
edvodef
i
ne,
ex
pl
a
i
noq
a
nus eq
5of
8veq
mu.

1
pi
eceof
ph
ovoI
D
Select the onesSe
that
are
easiest
foruie
you
tootwrite
about.
l
ecvvh
eoneuvh
a
va
q
eea
uvf
oq
y
vos q
i
vea
botv.

ExamSpecifics

LongAnswerStrategy
Long Answer Strategy

Bef
oq
ey
otuva
q
vs q
i
vi
ng
,
ma
k
ebtl
l
evnoveuf
oq
ea
ch
a
q
g
tmenva
nd
utppoq
vi
ng
f
a
cv/
deva
i
l
.

Before you start


writing,
make
bullet
notes
for
each
and
Al
l
rteuvi
onua
q
eca
ue
rteuvi
onu,
uotnd
eq
l
i
ne
a
ny
pargument
eopl
e,
compa
ni
eu,

a
c
v
i
o
nua
nd
d
a
v
e
uv
h
a
v
ma
y
a
p
p
e
a
q
i
nv
h
e
r
t
e
uv
i
o
n.

supporting fact/detail.
Evh
i
cu:
Uueuecvi
onu7
2&
7
7
voutppoq
vy
otq
a
q
g
tmenvua
nda
nus eq
u.

All questions are


questions,
so
underline
any
La
scase
:
Uueq
e
l
eva
nvl
eg
a
l
veq
mu&
pq
i
nci
pl
euvout
ppopeople,
q
vy
otq
a
q
g
tmenvu
a
nda
nus
eq
u.

companies, actions
and
dates
that may appear in the question.
Th
eex
a
mdoeun
vpeq
mi
vvh
etueof
a
di
cvi
ona
q
y
uopq
a
cvi
cea
nus eq
i
ng

Ethics: Use sections


72 &onub
77eto
support
your arguments and
ua
mpl
erteuvi
f
oq
eha
nd.

answers. Ack
nos l
edg
ebovhui
zeof
vh
ecoi
neveni
f
y
otdon
va
g
q
ees i
vh
vh
em.

Pq
i
nvi
ng
i
uea
ui
eq
f
oq
vh
eq
evi
es eq
voq
ea
dvh
a
nh
a
nds q
i
vi
ng
.

PEOmembeq
#

3oq
moq
eba
l
l
poi
nvpenu

Law: Use relevant legal terms & principles to support your


arguments
and answers.
Preparation

1
.Af
veq
y
oth
a
vethe
a
ppl
i
e
df
oq
a
e,
compl
evevh
ePP
Ea
ppl
i
ca
vi
onf
oq
m.

The exam doesnt


permit
use
oflicaenc
dictionary
so
practice
2.Ptq
ch
a
uebovh
vex
vbook
u(
Evh
i
cu,
La
s )
a
ndpq
i
nvof
f
a
l
l
ovh
eq
uy
l
l
a
btu
answering sample
questions
ma
veq
i
a
l
u(
PEAcv,
Rbeforehand.
eg
.
9
41
/
9
0
,
By

La
s #
1
,
D tvy
voRepoq
v)
.

3.Re
a
d
i
mp
o
q
v
a
nv
ue
cvi
o
nuof
veven
h
evex
vbif
ooyou
k
u(
vh
a
va
l
i
g
nsagree
i
vh
uy
l
l
a
b
tu)
.

Acknowledge both size of the


coin
dont
with
4.W a
vch
vh
evs oPPEvi
deou(
i
nuvq
tcvi
onuh
eq
e)
.

WhatNOTtoBring
them.
5.Tq
y
a
ua
mpl
eex
a
m&
compa
q
es i
vh
vq
tuvs oq
vh
y
uol
tvi
onu.

ha
ndba
g
u&
bq
i
ef
ca
ueu
Printing is easier
for
the
reviewer
to
read
than
handwriting.
6.Foq
y
otq
i
ncoq
q
ecva
nus eq
u,
g
o
ba
ck
vo
vh
eq
e
a
di
ng
ma
veq
i
a
l
uvouvtdy

Di
cvi
ona
q
i
euo
q
book
u
What
NOT
to
Bring
vh
ouevopi
cua
l
i
vvl
emoq
e.

7
.Repea
vuvepu5a
nd6(
si
vh
vs oovh
eq
ua
mpl
eex
a
mu)
.

8.Aq
q
i
ve1
5mi
ntveuea
q
l
y
vovh
eex
a
m&
s q
i
vevh
e3
h
otq
ex
a
m.

have
applied
aolicence,
complete
theil.
9
.W
a
i
v8
1
0
sfor
eek
uf
q
y
otpa
uui
ng
l
evveq
i
nvh
ema
PPE

uvtdy
noveuoq
chea
vuh
eevu

cellp
handbags
h
oneuoq
ovh
e&
q
briefcases
q
oni
cu.

elecvDictionaries
or books
study notes or cheat
sheets
cell phones or other
electronics.

Preparation
1. After you
application form.

2. Purchase both textbooks (Ethics, Law)


and print off all other
Printthisout&hangitonyourwall
syllabus materials (PE Act, Reg. 941/90, By-Law #1, Duty to
(butdonttakeitwithyoutotheexam
)
Report).
3. Read important sections of the textbooks (that align with
syllabus).
4. Watch the two PPE videos (instructions here).
5. Try a sample exam & compare with trustworthy solutions.
6. For your incorrect answers, go back
to the reading materials to thatgivesyou:flash
ForthemosttrustedPPEstudyguide
cardaccess,detailedexplanationsonhowtohandleshort&long
study those topics a little more.
7. Repeat steps 5 and 6 (with two answerquestions,aswellassampleexams(withfullsolutions),
other sample exams).
visitwww.practiceppeexams.ca/ppepracticeexamspeo.html
8. Arrive 15 minutes early to the exam & write the 3-hour exam.
9. Wait 8-10 weeks
for you passing letter in the mail.

Individual License for personal use only. May not be copied or distributed.