Skip to main content

Social Audit Failure: Legal Liability of External Auditors

  • Chapter
Social Audit Regulation

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

Abstract

Social auditing refers to the practice of external assurance or evaluation of an organisation's socially responsible reporting assertions. Usually, the reporting frameworks organisations use, such as the Global Reporting Index, are voluntary codes of reporting. For auditors accepting an engagement to review or assure such social reporting, the appropriate standards may be similarly voluntary. It is only during this century that financial accounting and reporting has developed a universal set of standards for assurance work on such engagements. By briefly tracing the history of financial reporting audit standards from no regulation, to self-regulation, to mandatory regulation, this chapter highlights the challenges to regulation of social audit faced by auditors, and identifies issues pertaining to auditor liability on social audits. Discussions about potential liability can be a useful lens to critique proposed solutions.

  • Quality standards and social auditing

  • Social audit regulation, issues and challenges

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    425 U.S. 185 (1976).

  2. 2.

    We have not included general criminal liability for fraud in this chapter. We are confining the scope to liability of auditors who carry out their routine functions—not liability of auditors who are dishonest, fraudulent or reckless.

  3. 3.

    [1932] AC 562.

  4. 4.

    In Daniels t/as Deloitte Haskins & Sells v AWA Ltd (1995) 16 ACSR 607, the end result was that the Court apportioned damage as 80 % contribution by the auditor and 20 % contribution by client management for the client firm’s loss a result of the audit failure.

  5. 5.

    Brown (1962) attributes this observation to the author of an early auditing monograph Montgomery (1913).

  6. 6.

    [1896] 2 Ch 279.

  7. 7.

    [1895] 2 Ch 673.

  8. 8.

    [1958] 1 WLR 45.

  9. 9.

    [1925] Ch 407.

  10. 10.

    Part 2 M.4 Div 3 Auditor Independence Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

  11. 11.

    Part 2 M.4 division 5 Auditor rotation for listed companies Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

  12. 12.

    Section 324CI Corporations Act 2001(Cth).

  13. 13.

    Section 300(11B) Corporations Act 2001(Cth).

  14. 14.

    (1970) 92 WN (NSW) 29.

  15. 15.

    [1961] 2 All ER 167.

  16. 16.

    (1992) 10 ACLC 933.

  17. 17.

    (1997) 188 CLR 241.

  18. 18.

    (1990) 8 ACLC 3,011.

  19. 19.

    Global Reporting Initiative guidelines, Dow Jones Sustainability Index, ISO14000 (environmental) series.

  20. 20.

    ISAE 3000 (Revised), Assurance Engagements Other than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information International Framework for Assurance Engagements and Related Conforming Amendments, para 12. See also Hassan et al. (2005).

  21. 21.

    (1931) 174 NE 441.

  22. 22.

    (1997) 188 CLR 241, 249–254 (Dawson J), 271–272 (McHugh J), 301 (Gummow J).

References

  • Alexander, D., & Jermakowicz, E. (2006). True and fair view of the principles/rules debate. Abacus, 42, 132–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, H. (1996). A different solution to the auditors’ liability dilemma. Bond Law Review, 8, Article 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arens, A., Elder, R., & Beasley, M. (2002). Auditing and Assurance Services (9th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice‐Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, C. R., Bedard, J., & Hauret, C. P. (2014). The regulation of statutory auditing: An institutional theory approach. Managerial Auditing Journal, 29, 371–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, R., & Fenn, D. H., Jr. (1972). The corporate social audit. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkett, W. P., & Walker, R. G. (1971). Response of the Australian accounting profession to failures in the 1960s. Abacus, 7, 97–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boehme, T. C., & Braddock, L. A. (1965). The Accountancy Research Foundation. The Australian Accountant, 573–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. G. (1962). Changing audit objectives and techniques. The Accounting Review, 696–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cane, P. (1991). Tort law and economic interests. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carnegie, G., & O’Connell, B. (2012). Understanding responses of professional accounting bodies to crises: The case of the Australian profession in the 1960s. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 25, 835–875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapple, L. J., & Koh, B. (2007). Regulatory responses to auditor independence dilemmas–who takes the stronger line? Australian Journal of Corporate Law, 21, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, J., Farrar, J., Puri, P., & Thorne, L. (2010). Auditor liability to third parties after Sarbanes-Oxley: An international comparison of regulatory and legal reforms. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 19, 66–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, F., & Dean, G. (2007). Indecent disclosure: Gilding the corporate lily. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, F., Dean, G., & Oliver, K. (1997). Corporate collapse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, A. (1994). The rationale for the recovery of economic loss in negligence and the problem of auditors’ liability. Melbourne University Law Review, 19, 814–867.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, L. (1939). The story of bookkeeping, accounting and auditing. Accounting Digest, 217

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogarty, M., & Lansley, A. (2002). Sleepers awake! Future directions for auditing in Australia. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 25, 408–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Free, C. (1999). Limiting auditors’ liability. Bond Law Review, 11, article 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, R., & Arnold, R. (1981). The development of auditing standards in Australia. Accounting Historians Journal, 8, 51–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Reporting Initiative. (2013). G4 Sustainability reporting guidelines: Reporting principles and standard disclosures. Amsterdam: Global Reporting Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (2006). Social, environmental and sustainability reporting and organisational value creation? Whose value? Whose creation? Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 19, 793–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassan, M., Maijoor, S., Mock, T., Roebuck, P., Simnett, R., & Vanstraelen, A. (2005). The different types of assurance services and levels of assurance provided. International Journal of Auditing, 9, 91–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hecimovic, A., Martinov-Bennie, N., & Roebuck, P. (2009). The force of law: Australian auditing standards and their impact on the auditing profession. Australian Accounting Review, 19, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higson, A. (2003). Developments in auditing and assurance in corporate financial reporting: Theory and practice. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huggins, A., Green, W., & Simnett, R. (2011). The competitive market for assurance engagements on Greenhouse Gas statements: Is there a role for assurers from the accounting profession? Current Issues in Auditing, 5, A1–A12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICAEW. (2010). Sustainability assurance: Your choice (re: Assurance initiative). London: Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICAS. (2012). A professional judgment framework for financial reporting: An international guide for preparers, auditors, regulators and standard setters. Edinburgh: Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Junior, R., Best, P., & Cotter, J. (2014). Sustainability reporting and assurance: A historical analysis on a word-wide phenomenon. Journal of Business Ethics, 120, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2011). Elevating professional judgment in auditing and accounting: The KPMG professional judgment framework. New Jersey: KPMG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T. H., & Ali, A. M. (2008). The evolution of auditing: An analysis of the historical development. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, 4, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littleton, A. C. (1933). Accounting evolution to 1900. New York: American Institute Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGladrey, L. L. P. (2012). Using professional judgment in auditing: McGladrey’s framework. Minneapolis: McGladrey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mock, T., Rao, S., & Srivastava, R. (2013). The development of worldwide sustainability reporting assurance. Australian Accounting Review, 23, 280–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, R. H. (1913). Auditing theory and practice. New York: The Ronald Press Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morimoto, R., Ash, J., & Hope, C. (2005). Corporate social responsibility audit: From theory to practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 62, 315–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, B. (2007). Auditors’ responsibilities with respect to corporate fraud—A controversial issue. In M. Sherer & S. Turley (Eds.), Current issues in auditing. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, I. (2001). Independence of Australian company auditors: Review of current Australian requirements and proposals for reform. Report to the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, I., & Austin, R. (online) Ford’s principles of corporate law. Sydney: Lexis Nexis Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Report, C. (1992). The financial aspects of corporate governance. London: The Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance and Gee and Co. Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samsonova, A. (2010). Rethinking auditor liability: The case of the European Union’s regulatory reform. Paper presented at Asia Pacific Interdisciplinary research in Accounting (APIRA) conference, Sydney, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simnett, R., Nugent, M., & Huggins, A. (2009). Developing an international assurance standard on Greenhouse Gas statements. Accounting Horizons, 23, 347–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simnett, R., Vanstraelen, A., & Chua, W. F. (2009). Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison. The Accounting Review, 84, 937–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tackett, J., Wolf, F., & Claypool, G. (2004). Sarbanes‐Oxley and audit failure: A critical examination. Managerial Auditing Journal, 19, 340–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank colleagues Scott Hirst and YuYu Zhang for their helpful comments and support, and we are grateful to the anonymous reviewer for their insights that have helped focus the chapter’s contribution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Larelle Ellie Chapple .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chapple, L.E., Mui, G.Y. (2015). Social Audit Failure: Legal Liability of External Auditors. In: Rahim, M., Idowu, S. (eds) Social Audit Regulation. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15838-9_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics