Table of Contents Introduction Accountants’ Liability to the Client and Third-Party A) Breach of Contract B) Ordinary Negligence (Accountant Malpractice) C) Fraud a. Constructive Fraud (Gross Negligence) b. Actual Fraud Accountants’ Liability under Common Law for Third-Party A) The Near-Privity Doctrine B) The Restatement Doctrine C) The Foreseeability Doctrine D) The Balancing-Factors Doctrine Accountants’ Liability under Statutory Law Third-Party A) Securities Act of 1933 B) Securities
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Enron Accounting scandals
between citizens contract‚ tort‚ family‚ property‚ wills -Public —Involves disputes between citizens and state crime‚ administrative‚ constitutional‚ tax‚ industrial Lecture 2 Torts: Tort Common Law 2 Areas: - Product Liability (part 3-5) - Negligent misstatements (S 18) 2.7 Manufacturers to consumers Donoghue v Stevenson‚ Levi v Colgate-Palmolive 2.9 Manufacturers to distributors of products McPherson Ltd v Eaton 2.10 Service providers Stennett v Hancock & Peters Commercial 2.11 Property
Premium Contract
Consensus is a subjective agreement by two parties to make a contract. Improperly consensus is when a contract has been obtained in a manner in which in the eyes of the law is improper. This contract is regarded as voidable meaning that one of the parties who is innocent has a choice whether or not to have the contract declared void. If the innocent party chooses to uphold the contract it is entirely valid and may be enforced like any other contract. However if the party chooses to set the contract
Premium Contract Contract law
responsibility with respect to audited financial statement is: a. The auditor ’s responsibility on fair presentation of financial statements is limited only up to the date of the audit report. b. The auditor is responsible for detecting misstatements on the financial statements. c. The responsibility over the financial statements rests with the management. d. The auditor ’s responsibility is limited to the expression of
Premium Auditing Audit Financial audit
Evaluate the auditors’ current responsibility to detect corporate fraud. What factors should be of consideration when deciding on the appropriate level? Prepared for Professor Brenda Porter Course Co-ordinator‚ BEA 2004 Auditing Author Ho Jian Hong‚ Shawn BA (Hons) Accounting and Finance University of Exeter Tutor Dr Amama Shaukat Tutorial (Wednesday 11am) Date 1st May 2011 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Corporate fraud is a problem within society that has been on an upward trend over
Premium Audit Auditing Financial audit
discussed regarding the possibility of Lakeside Company going public and the ramifications this action would have on their desirability as a client. We have also analyzed Lakeside Company’s financial statements to evaluate the possibility of misstatements. Attached‚ you will find our report discussing these issues. Please contact us with any further questions. Sincerely‚ Mariana Welch Cc: Bob Zimmerman Case Two: New Clients‚ Legal Liability and Materiality Table of Contents
Premium Management United States Psychology
3 Lifting the veil SUMMARY Introduction Statutory examples Veil lifting by the courts Classical veil lifting‚ 1897–1966 The interventionist years‚ 1966–1989 Back to basics‚ 1989–present Tortious liability Parent company personal injury tortious liability Commercial tort The costs/benefits of limited liability Introduction 3.1 Book 7a.indb 31 You may not unnaturally wonder at this point what the phrase ‘lifting the veil’ is about. It refers to the situations where the judiciary
Premium Corporation Limited liability Subsidiary
|This paper must be returned. | FAMILY NAME............................................................. | |Candidates are not permitted to |FIRST NAME................................................................. | |remove any part of it from the |STUDENT NO................................................................ | |examination room. |SEAT NO..................................ROOM NO........
Premium Financial audit Audit Risk
THE RELATIONSHIP OF RISK ASSESSMENTS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TO DETECTED MISSTATEMENTS Lizabeth A. Austen Assistant Professor University of Arkansas Aasmund Eilifsen Associate Professor Institute of Accounting‚ Auditing and Law Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration William F. Messier‚ Jr. Deloitte & Touche Professor Georgia State University Professor II Institute of Accounting‚ Auditing and Law Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration Preliminary Draft:
Premium Internal control Audit Auditing
............... Evaluating the Effect of Misstatements ......................................................... 1-3 4-8 9-11 12-16 International Standard on Auditing (ISA) 320‚ “Audit Materiality” should be read in the context of the “Preface to the International Standards on Quality Control‚ Auditing‚ Assurance and Related Services‚” which sets out the application and authority of ISAs. The Audit Risk Standards the Risks of Material Misstatement‚” ISA 330‚ “The Auditor’s Procedures in Response
Premium Auditing Financial audit Financial statements