StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Negligence of Auditors - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
The paper "Negligence of Auditors " states that generally speaking, the auditing reports provide fundamental evidence that as explained in the case of Ansett in Australia helped the government protect the millions of investors from incurring huge losses…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER92.6% of users find it useful
Negligence of Auditors
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Negligence of Auditors"

Business law Question Policy Negligence refers to an occurrence caused by neglect of responsibility thereby causing either lossof life or financial investments. Various corporate institutions that collapse cause varied financial losses for both investors and employees. The investors vary from shareholders to the creditors whom the company relies on for steady funding. Following such collapses, the stakeholders always demand accountability for their investments a feature that compels the launch of investigation into the causes of the collapses. Negligence as a cause of the collapse of a corporate organization arises from the actions of the management of the organization thereby necessitating the subsequent financial loses1. While the determination of the causes of the collapse of corporate organizations is fundamental, courts discourage the filing of such cases by either the shareholders or creditors. The decision by courts to adopt the cautionary approach to such cases arises from a policy that seeks to protect the interest of the entire industry. Such subsequent claims undermine the future of the entire industry owing to the large volumes of indeterminate liabilities. After the collapse of a company, it becomes difficult to quantify the actual investment of every financer. Most of such organizations lose their assets a feature that makes it difficult for investigations to determine the actual liability the organization owes every investor. This has a negative influence on both the industry and the economy since auditors will subsequently withhold their services2. As explained earlier, quantifying unknown liabilities discourages the participation of auditors of will not trace such liabilities. The policy therefore seeks to protect the interests of all the stakeholders in the industry3. Question 2: Case law Various companies have collapsed through scandalous ways in Australia among other markets throughout the world. In the legal tussles that ensued after the collapse of such companies, the courts maintained integral view often seeking to cushion the various publics from incurring major financial loses4. Auditors have integral responsibilities in the evaluating and quantifying the amount of financial loses all the parties incur. However, the decisions of the courts vary depending on the unique features presented by every case. Ansett Australia, once a major airline company in Australia collapsed in 2002 following a series of unwarranted market forces. The company began incurring losses in 1999 following unscrupulous operations thereby prompting the courts to make various unprecedented rulings on the future of the company in order to protect the interests of all the parties involved. Among such decisions was the need to place the company under administration in 2001 and organized liquidation in 2002. In the year following the insolvency of the company, the court sought to make profits for the company thereby reimbursing the investors whenever possible. Public companies obtain most of their funding from the public through the purchase of shares; this requires effective administration coupled with the need for integrity in order to sustain the profitability objective demanded by every investor. Ansett Australia was such a company that had won public trust owing to its monopolistic nature. A large operational capital equally required increased and sustained profitability in order to grow the company and earn profits for the investors5. When the companies began incurring losses in 1999, the Australian court ordered for the audit of the company. This would help determine the financial flow in the company. The auditing process seeks to determine any fraud by determining any illegal movement of money. The auditors also determine the source of the losses in the company. In doing this, the auditors maintain an integral position since the parties in the case can equally sue the auditors for fraud should they collude with the interested parties to hide some financial movement. The auditing process in Ansett cases determined poor investment options as the source of the loss. They also determined that continued operation of the company would result in more financial loses for the various investors6. The decision to place the company under administration would therefore protect the investors from incurring unnecessary loses. Through the period, the government would supervise the management of the company as it paid its debts. This would protect the economy that would suffer great financial dip following the shocks created by the rapid collapse of such a big company. The Ansett case thus exhibits the conscious of portrayed by the courts and their attempts to protect the investors and to perpetuate the operations of the auditing firms. The court adopted the report developed by the auditors and sued it as a major reference point in the case. Question 3: Negligence of auditors The legal liability of an auditor refers to the responsibility of the auditor to both the client and the third parties relying on the work of the auditor. In most cases, such third parties include the shareholders and creditors of the company7. Any of such parties can sue the auditor for either fraud or negligence provided they can prove breach of contract, loses, causation and duty. The law protects all the parties from shoddy work by the auditors should such work contain errors of either omission or commission. In determining the errors, the interested party must therefore prove the above factors to the court. In tort or common law, negligence in the other hand refers to failure to act reasonably in like circumstances. This demands that people act carefully and cautious of the harm their actions present to those around them. The same is required of people tasked with various responsibilities. In a court of law, one should prove the potential of harm caused in order to prove negligence. This will also only prove the harm caused by inattentiveness but not intentional harm. Question 4: Opinion I agree with the current law The difference in the definition of negligence in the two case scenarios arises from the importance of auditors. Auditors’ negligence cause similar loses whether intentional or accidental. As professionals, auditors must always prove the quality of their works by delivering the desired quality of in their every assignment8. The credibility of court cases and the fates of all the parties entangled in such depend on the report provided by the auditors. The auditing reports provide fundamental evidence that as explained in the case of Ansett in Australia helped the government protect the millions of investors from incurring huge loses. The current law therefore seeks to protect the parties of similar court cases thereby maintaining the legitimacy and integrity required in the profession. The law does not isolate the auditors but reminds them of the seriousness of their jobs and the need to act with both integrity and caution in order to prevent either intentional or unintentional auditing mistakes. Bibliography Carroll, B. (1980). Australian Aviators An Illustrated History. North Ryde: Cassell Australia. Feinman, J. (2010). Law 101. New York: Oxford University Press. Kapardis, A. (2009). Psychology and law: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Miller Steamship Co Pty [1966] 2 All E.R. 709 Palsgraf v. Long Island Rail Road Co. (1928) 162 N.E. 99 Slomanson, W. (2011). Fundamental Perspectives on International Law. Boston, USA: Wadsworth. Ultramares Corp. v. Touche(1931) 255 N.Y. 170, 174 N.E. 441 Whittington, R. & Pany, K. (2012). Principles of Auditing and Other Assurance Services (18 ed ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Publishers. Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Business law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 10”, n.d.)
Business law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 10. Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/law/1625644-business-law
(Business Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words - 10)
Business Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words - 10. https://studentshare.org/law/1625644-business-law.
“Business Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words - 10”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/law/1625644-business-law.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Negligence of Auditors

The Role of External Auditors in Accounting

Pertaining to the profession of auditors, auditors' liability has always been one of the main concerns of the public.... Often dealt with common law, tort law or both, auditors' liability could arise out of unfair or unjust practices when it comes to auditing a company's financial standing.... hellip; Auditor liability or auditors' inability to detect and report illegal manipulations of the financial statement could lead to serious damages on the part of the shareholders of the company....
16 Pages (4000 words) Essay

Recovery of economic loss in negligence

RECOVERY OF ECONOMIC LOSS IN negligence Question # 1 Economic loss has been defined in the case of A.... hellip; One is pure economic loss and the other is consequential economic loss in negligence.... Economic loss in this sense is not recoverable under negligence or strict liability in tort.... Recovery of pure economic loss in negligence is a complex and difficult area of law.... This principle is based on the necessity to limit the potentially unlimited liability, which can theoretically flow from negligence; otherwise, permitting recovery purely of economic nature will paralyze the judicial system and the society in general....
5 Pages (1250 words) Essay

Consequential and Pure Economic Loss in Negligence

Name: Tutor: Course: Date: University: Consequential and pure economic loss in negligence S.... Anthony, (2009) Economic loss is not always is not always irrecoverable in the tort of negligence, but it requires a claimant to prove the exceptional circumstances necessary in order to establish that a defendant owed him a duty of not to cause such damage....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

Legislation and the Auditing Profession in the UK

There are also the auditors Regulations of 2007, which control the activities of the Audit profession in the UK.... auditors are required by Law to follow ISA (UK and Ireland) 700 in the formation of an auditor's report on financial statements, as issued by the Financial Reporting Council.... Common Law versus Auditing Profession in the UK The UK court system has taken responsibility of safeguarding shareholders, who are termed as third parties, from fraudulent activities of company directors, in collaboration with auditors and audit firms....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

Auditing failures and quantitative measurement of materiality judgement

It is evident that auditors' firms usually end up paying the penalty without agreeing or denying the charges (Peursem, Zhou, Flood, and Buttimore, 2007; United States Securities and Exchange Commission, 2013).... In almost all cases of the audit fraud, the auditors are investigated for supporting fraud in lieu of having direct and indirect financial interest in the organization or negligence....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

Tort Problem and Negligent Misstatements

Whoever makes a claim due to somebody's negligence besides proving duty of care, breach and damages, must also show extra factors under 'duty' As pure economic loss caused by negligence is not a tort but liability under common law negligence.... There was also no negligence on the part of the bankers.... n the other hand whether Helen as well as Andrew can claim compensation from the Surveyor depends on the principles of duty of care, fiduciary relationship, and negligence....
5 Pages (1250 words) Case Study

Case study on the overall audit process

But they failed to comply adequately with GAAS and thus failed their role as auditors.... Being a brokerage firm registered under the Securities Exchange Act, Whitlow and Company is required to undergo an annual audit.... Their 2009 audit… cated no problem, but despite some competence on the part of the auditing company, Mitchell & Moss, a failure to comply with GAAS led Mitchell & Moss audit to be deficient....
5 Pages (1250 words) Case Study

The Law of Torts for Protection the Interests of the Other People

The research presents how tort law refers to civil wrongs to other people not arising from a contract and a duty of everyone to care for their neighbors in relation to negligence.... From the above scenario, it can be observed Dick, Laura, Tony, and Jacque have rights to file a lawsuit against Mark who is liable for the tort of negligence....
5 Pages (1250 words) Essay
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us