explain the impact that the pacific acceptance case had on

Assignment Detail:- Question 1- Why would the courts want to limit the ability of third parties to sue auditors who have been negligent???? Are there any arguments that this liability should not be limited???? Question 2- A- Explain the impact that the Pacific Acceptance case had on existing auditing practice- B- List four of the procedures or practices that were identified in the ruling as being part of a competent audit- Question 3- Match the case with the ruling: Cases:                                                                          Rulings: Caparo Industries Pty Ltd v- Dickman Duty of Care owed to third parties in the absence of a contract where the plaintiff has suffered physical injury Kingston Cotton Mill Co- The standards for an auditor's level of skill and care are more exacting today than in 1896 Segenhoe Ltd v- Akins & Ors Third party liability for auditors under the tort of negligence AWA Ltd v- Daniels An auditor's duty of care is owed to shareholders as a group, not to individual shareholders Donoghue v- Stevenson An auditor is a watchdog, but not a bloodhound Twomax Ltd v- Dickson, McFarlane & Robinson Contributory negligence Pacific Acceptance Corporation Ltd v- Forsyth Auditors are liable for any dividends paid out of capital due to auditor negligence
solvedassignments.net Rated 4.8 / 5 based on 22789 reviews.

Helping Students of Australia/New Zealand, GET Help with Classroom Assignments? Order Now