About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

31 Queen's L.J. 148 (2005-2006)
The Rights and Responsibilities of Auditors to Third Parties: A Call for a Principled Approach

handle is hein.journals/queen31 and id is 160 raw text is: The Rights and Responsibilities of Auditors to Third Parties: A Call for a Principled Approach Leon E. Trakman* and Jason Trainor' In the wake of corporate finance and accounting scandals around the world, new legislation enacted in Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom aims to better police the conduct of auditors and to increase the independence of auditors from their clients. This legislation does not, however, offer remedies to investors who suffer losses as a result of relying on substandard audits. While courts will hold negligent or fraudulent auditors accountable to the corporations for whom they work through the law of contract, they will not hold them accountable to investors and other third parties. Common law courts in particular have relied on untested public policy arguments to deny investors compensation for claims of negligent misrepresentation. The authors argue that the powers exercised by auditors come with a public responsibility to protect third parties from the impact of auditor negligence or fraud, since investors and other third parties who rely on audited statements have valuable economic interests that ought to be recognized and upheld. They go on to present a coherent rationale by which courts could recognize and protect those interests. They reason that auditors owe responsibilities to third parties, not because third parties have the right not to be affected by the acts of auditors but because auditors themselves are responsible for the exercise of their own rights. Courts must recognize that auditors serve public functions: they provide financial statements that they know will influence investors and other third parties. Since the exercise of an auditor's rights impacts the public, the rights of auditors must necessarily be constrained by this public responsibility, and a breach should be actionable. The authors conclude by identifying several advantages that willflow from the legal recognition of auditor responsibility. *B.Comm., LL.B. (Cape Town); LL.M., S.J.D. (Harvard). Dean and Professor of Law at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia. **B.A. (Brock); M.A., LL.B. (Dalhousie). Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP in Toronto, Canada. The authors thank Sean Gatien, Christopher C. Nicholls, Will K. Weinstein, Brian P. Koscak and Jason Green for their comments on preliminary drafts of the article, and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the University of New South Wales for supporting the study. (2005) 31 Queen's L.J.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most