Die gemeenregtelike deliktuele aanspreeklikheid van ouditeure teenoor derde partye vir nalatige wanvoorstelling in finansiële state: 'n regsvergelykende studie

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Date
2003-12
Authors
Moolman, Hermanus Johannes
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of the Free State
Abstract
English: Auditors all over the world believe that they are the unfair victims of claims of third parties in the case of negligent misrepresentations in financial statements. They believe that they are exposed to unlimited liability and regard their liability as one of the biggest threats of the auditors'profession. The study of auditors' common law liability towards third parties for misrepresentation in financial statements according to the English, American, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and South African judicial system, however, does not support auditors' fears that they are beingexposed to unlimited liability towards third parties. Although auditors have been exposed to potential unlimited liability since the sixties, the common law of England, the United States of America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand has revealed a tendency to limit the liability of auditors towards third parties since the late eighties. The study of Anglo-American judicial systems emphasises the creation and breakdown of a duty of care before auditors can be held responsible towards third parties. Different standards have been developed to determine whether auditors owe a duty of care to third parties. The consulted systems implement a standard that prescribes foreseeability of damages and a relationship of proximity as prerequisites for the creation of a duty of care. An auditor can be held responsible only on the grounds of misrepresentation in the financial statements if the financial statements have been prepared for a specific receiver, or if the auditor was aware or should reasonably have foreseen that the auditor's report would be handed over to a specific person or limited group of people, or would be used for a specific aim, or if the auditor directly informed the receiver that the information in the auditor's report is the truth. In contrast to the Anglo-American judicial system that emphasises the creation and breakdown of a duty of care to limit auditors' responsibility, South African common law applies the five general principles or requisites of a delict to limit auditors' liability towards third parties. It is especially the elements of unlawfulness and fault that play an important role in the limitation of auditors' liability towards third parties.
Afrikaans: Ouditeure wereldwyd meen dat hulle die onregverdige slagoffers is van die eise van derde partye in die geval van nalatige wanvoorstellings in finansiele state. Hulle meen dat hulle blootgestel word aan onbeperkte aanspreeklikheid en beskou hul aanspreelikheid as een van die grootstebedreigings vir die ouditeursprofessie. Die bestudering van ouditeure se gemeenregtlike aanspreeklikheid teenoor derdes vir wanvoorstellings in finansiele state ingevolge die Engelse, Amerikaanse, Kanadese, Australiese, Nieu-Seelandse en SuidAfrikaanse reg ondersteun egter nie ouditeure se vrese dat hulle blootgestel word aan onbeperkte aanspreeklikheid teenoor derdes nie. Alhoewel ouditeure wel vanaf die sestigerjare aan potensiele onbeperkte aanspreeklikheid blootgestel is, toon die gemenereg van Engeland, die Verenigde State van Amerika, Kanada, Australie en Nieu-Seeland sedert die laat tagtigerjare 'n neiging om ouditeure se aanspreeklikheid teenoor derde partye te beperk. Die bestudeerde Anglo-Amerikaanse regstelsels plaas klem op die totstandkoming en verbreking van 'n sorgsaamheidsverpligting alvorens ouditeure teenoor derde partye aanspreeklik kan wees. Verskillende standaarde is ontwikkel om vas te stel of ouditeure 'n sorgsaamheidsverpligting aan derde partye verskuldig is. Die bestudeerde stelsels wend 'n standaard aan wat voorsienbaarheid van skade en 'n verhouding van nabyheid as vereistes stel vir die totstandkoming van 'n sorgsaamheidsverpligting. 'n Ouditeur kan slegs op grand van wanvoorstellings in die finansiele state aanspreeklik gehou word indien die finansiele state vir 'n spesifieke ontvanger voorberei is of indien die ouditeur daarvan bewus was of redelikerwys daarvan bewus behoort te gewees het dat die ouditverslag aan 'n spesifieke persoon of beperkte groep persone oorhandig gaan word of vir 'n bepaalde oogmerk aangewend gaan word, of indien die ouditeur direk aan die ontvanger meegedeel het dat die 'inligting vervat in die ouditverslag juis is. In teenstelling met die Anglo-Amerikaanse reg wat klem plaas op die totstandkoming en verbreking van 'n sorgsaamheidsverpligting om ouditeure se aanspreeklikheid te begrens, wend die Suid-Afrikaanse gemenereg die vyf algemene beginsels of vereistes van 'n delik aan om ouditeure se aanspreeklikheid teenoor derdes te begrens. Dit is veral die onregmatigheids- en skuldelemente wat 'n belangrike rol speel in die begrensing van ouditeure se aanspreeklikheid teenoor derde partye.
Description
Keywords
Acts and omissions, Auditors' liability, Causation, Common law liability, Delictual liability, Duty of care, Fault, Foreseeability of damages, Limitation of auditors' liability, Limited class of users, Misrepresentation in financial statements, Negligent misrepresentation, Professional liability, Pure economic loss, Relationship of proximity, Unlawfulness, Dissertation (LL.M. (Mercantile Law))--University of the Free State, 2003
Citation