The alternative courses of action which are available with respect to the scenario are
The best possible course of action which has been identified in relation to the scenario is that Jacqui should observe integrity and be honest to herself by conveying her personal knowledge to modern fertilizers with respect to Dumparound. This is because doing nothing where a client could be saved from various losses easily if they are provided with relevant information would be ethically and morally incorrect on the part of any professional accountant.
In case Jacqui decides to abide by the instructions of Berry and not notify Morgan fertilizers about the problems which may arise out of the contract with Dumparound Limited she may cause significant financial losses to the company who has been one of the long standing lines of the firm she is working in. Although this action would ensure that Jacqui has abided by the instructions provided by her supervisor.
In case Jacqui decides to inform Morgan fertilizers using her own personal knowledge about environmental issues that the contract with Dumparound limited would get them into financial trouble along with bring detriment to the Goodwill of the company she might be able to save the company from such losses but she may be terminated from her position as she did not abide by the instructions of her supervisor. In addition, this action does not seem to bring any detriment to the form and further may bring benefits as the long standing client Morgan fertilizers would realise that the firm is not only interested in providing them correct financial but also towards ensuring that they do not suffer any kind of losses.
In case Jacqui decides to personally notified Morgan fertilizers about the losses they may face outside the course of employment with MYH, she may breach her ethical responsibilities towards the firm, however these actions would ensure that she acted in Public Interest according to the principles of CPA and saved a company who is the long standing clients of the firm from suffering financial and Goodwill losses. This course of action would ensure that she has a guided by the principles of integrity and honesty however she would not be able to be loyal to the firm she is working for.
The final step of solving the ethical dilemma using the American accounting Association model is to come to a final decision. The final decision has to be taken by choosing one of the alternative course of action by considering the weight age of their consequences. In this particular case the best possible decision with Jacqui might take in order to address the ethical dilemma she is in is that, she should inform Morgan fertilizers personally about the losses which might arise to them if they continue with the contract they have with Dumparound Limited. This course of action would not only ensure that she has acted with integrity and honesty towards our profession and personal knowledge but also ensure that she has been to a large extent loyal towards MYH.
The issue which has to be identified in relation to the provided scenario is that whether Oasis ltd would be able to bring a successful claim against MYH ltd with respect to negligent auditing.
In the case of Boyd v. Ackley (1962), 32 D.L.R. a claim for negligence was bought by the plaintiff against an accountant company. The claimant alleged that the accountant company breach the duty of care and were negligent towards providing a negligent misstatement which made the plaintiff over pay a third party. The court in this case held at as lawyers and doctors owe a duty of reasonable care towards clients and patients while rendering their services it is implied that there would be a duty to act reasonably imposed on an accountant while providing financial advice to the plaintiff. Thus, if it is found that the plaintiff was actually injured by the negligent actions of the accountant they would be liable to compensate the plaintiff for any loss incurred by them.
The case of Sali v Metzke & Allen [2009] VSC 48 was related to negligence by accountants. In this case the professional liability scheme was established by the court. It was held that the professional accounting firm failed to detect a wrongful act and were liable for such negligence. However the liability of the firm was proportionated and they were not made liable for the entire loss incurred by the victims. The court found that the accountant firm was only liable to pay 30% of the compensation and as the other wrongdoer was not sued, the plaintiff was not entitled for the rest 70% of its losses.
In the case of HARRIS SCARFE LTD (RECEIVERS & MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQ) & ORS v ERNST & YOUNG & ORS [2006] SASC 148 the accounting firm of the company was held liable by the court to pay a huge compensation of $220 Millions as it was found that if the auditors of the company would have properly done that job, receivership would have been initiated against the company in the 1990 by its banks. The court in this case found that the auditors were grossly negligent and incompetent in this case as they fail to uncover a systematic and widespread fraud of the illegal accounting done by the company. If the auditors would have only used ordinary competence towards audits and reviews of the companies account it would have been fairly easy for them to disclose and detect the fraud the company engaged in (Moroney et al., 2014).
According to CPA Australia Limited it is compulsory for all auditors could you leave visit stocktakes when the inventory is of a materialistic nature. As provided by the CPA Australia Limited the work of the auditor has to be totally independent and the company of whose audit is undertaken has to support search independence of the auditors by not putting any pressure at them with respect to time, fees or any other detriment or inducements (Karaibrahimoglu & Cangarli, 2016)
In the case of Esanda Finance v Peat Marwick Hungerfords (1997) 188 CLR 241 the high court of Australia held that Accountants do not hold duty of care to any third party. however the court alongside provided that a duty of care exist in circumstances where the audit firm has knowledge that a specific third party would have relied on the work of the audit firm in relation to a particular transaction.
In the provided scenario it has been given that the audit report of Morgan fertilizers depicted that they were having a very high level of inventory at the time Oasis limited made a successful takeover bid. It was later discovered by Oasis that the actual inventory held by Morgan fertilizers who are very much overvalued and the quantity of inventory claimed by the audit report was also not present.
As provided by the CP guidelines it is the responsibility of all auditors while preparing an audit report for a company to personally visit all stock takes where materialistic inventory is present. However it is provided to the scenario that MYH did not attend the bathrust facility of Morgan fertilizers and relied on the information provided by the company with respect to the value of the stocks. The missing inventory was in relation to the very facility which MYH did not visit and the overvaluation was in relation to the data provided by the management of Morgan fertilizers. This act of MYH is significant to establish that they did not take reasonable care towards auditing the accounts of modern fertilizers. There have been various instances as discussed above in the rules where auditing companies had been made liable for not observing due care with respect to the audit of a company’s account where fraud and misrepresentation was involved. Such as the cases of HARRIS SCARFE LTD and Sali discussed above.
However it has been provided by the scenario that MYH was pressurized by Morgan fertilizers to complete the audit in one month of the balance date. This act by Morgan fertilizers can be considered as an act of restricting the independence of the auditors which can be claimed as a defence by MYH.
As provided in the case of Esanda Finance Corporation Audit Company only has a duty of care towards third party where it is provided that the audit company had knowledge that the third party would use the information provided by the company with respect to a specific transaction. In this particular scenario it has been provided that there is no evidence that MYH was actually aware that the accounts would be used by Oasis for the purpose of the takeover. Thus, if there is no duty of care involved the question of negligence does not arise. Only if Oasis would be able to prove that MYH had knowledge that their accounts would be used by the company for the successful takeover bid can they establish a claim of negligence against them.
Conclusion
There would be a weak claim of negligence by Oasis against MYH if they are not able to prove that MYH had knowledge that their accounts would be used by the company for the successful takeover
References
Australia, C. P. A. (2014). A Guide to Understanding Annual Report. Sydney. https://www. cpaaustralia. com. au/~/media/corporate/allfiles/document/professionalresources/reporting/guide-to-understanding-annual-reporting. pdf.
Australia, C. P. A., Australia, C. A., & Zealand, N. (2016). Professional Accreditation Guidelines for Australian Accounting Degrees. CPA Australia and Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand, available at https://www. cpaaustralia. com. au/cpa-program/professional-accreditation-guidelines, accessed, 14.
Boyd v. Ackley (1962), 32 D.L.R.
Brown, R., 2015. The profession: The tangled ethical web. Professional Planner, (78), p.30.
Esanda Finance v Peat Marwick Hungerfords (1997)
HARRIS SCARFE LTD (RECEIVERS & MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQ) & ORS v ERNST & YOUNG & ORS [2006] SASC 148
Horizons, A. (2017). American Accounting Association.
Karaibrahimoglu, Y. Z., & Cangarli, B. G. (2016). Do auditing and reporting standards affect firms’ ethical behaviours? The moderating role of national culture. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(1), 55-75.
Moroney, R., Campbell, F., Hamilton, J., & Warren, V. (2014). Auditing: A Practical Approach. Wiley Global Education.
Sali v Metzke & Allen [2009] VSC 48
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download