Reform of the audit process and the role of shareholder voice: Transatlantic perspectives

European Business Organization Law Review

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 223-292

  Anand, Anita ^a   Moloney, Niamh ^b  

^a QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

audit process; audit reform; corporate governance; disclosure; Enron; investor confidence; Sarbanes Oxley Act; shareholder democracy; shareholder isolation; shareholder voice

Indexed keywords

EID: 84927053367     PISSN: 15667529     EISSN: 17416205     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S156675290400223X     Document Type: Review

References (311)

1. 54 University of Toronto Law Journal (2004) p. 1.
2. Higgs Review of the Role and Effectiveness of Non-Executive Directors (January 2003) [hereinafter, Higgs Report]
3. High Level Group of Company Law Experts, A Modern Regulatory Framework for Company Law in Europe (November 2002) [hereinafter, Winter Report]
4. Commission Communication, Modernising Company Law and Enhancing Corporate Governance in the European Union, COM (2003) 284 [hereinafter, 2003 EU Company Law Action Plan].
5. [hereinafter, Winter Report]
6. Canadian Securities Administrators' Press Release of 29 March 2004, online: < www.csa-acvm.ca/html-CSA/news/04-05new-disclosure.htm >;
7. Commission des valeurs mobilières, online: < www.cvmq.com >;
8. British Columbia Securities Commission, online < www.bcsc.be.ca >.
9. E.R. Greenstein and R.D. Bandman, 'Post Enron: Auditor Independence, Regulation and Disclosure', 1320 PLI/Corp (2002) p. 217 at p. 222.
10. Final Report of the Co-ordinating Group on Audit and Accounting Issues (2003) [hereinafter, 2003 CGAA Report]
11. DTI, Review of the Regulatory Regime of the Accounting Profession Post Enron (2002) [hereinafter, 2003 Regulatory Review Report]
12. Audit Committees and Combined Code Guidance. A Report and Proposed Guidance by a Group Chaired by Sir Robert Smith [hereinafter, 2003 Smith Audit Committee Report].
13. Treasury Committee, Sixth Report: The Regulation of Public Listed Companies, Volume I, Report and Proceedings of the Committee (June 2002).
14. EU level, focus has been trained directly on the statutory audit as part of the wider movement towards pan-EU corporate governance reform with the Commission Communication on Reinforcing the Statutory Audit in the EU, COM (2003) 286 [hereinafter, 2003 EU Statutory Audit Action Plan]
15. Commission's March 2004 Proposal for a Directive on the statutory audit of annual accounts and consolidated accounts and amending the Eighth Company Law Directive on the Statutory Audit, COM (2004) 177 [hereinafter, Statutory Audit Proposal].
16. G. Quillen and A.G. June, 'Trends and Current Issues in Professional Standards, GAAS and GAAP', 1309 PLI/Corp (2002) p. 65 at p. 71.
17. F. Kapner, 'Of milk and money: arrests multiply as investigators cast their net wider in Parmalat's unfolding 10bn fraud', Financial Times, 9 January 2004).
18. P. Norman, 'Parmalat changes mood in Brussels', Financial Times, Fund Management Supplement, 9 February 2004;
19. H. Simonian and R. Milne, 'Investors hit by new scandal', Financial Times, 13 January 2004.
20. J. Plender, 'Schooled by scandal: what auditors and investors still have to learn from Europe's accounting debacles', Financial Times, 22 January 2004.
21. E. Van Der Plaats, 'Regulating Auditor Independence', 9 European Accounting Rev. (2000) p. 625.
22. M.L. DeFond and K.R. Subramanyam, 'Auditor Changes and Discretionary Accruals', 25 J. Acct. & Econ. (1998) p. 35
23. R. Dye, 'Informationally Motivated Auditor Replacement', 14 J. Acct. & Econ. (1991) p. 347;
24. R. Antle and B. Nalebuff, 'Conservatism and Auditor-Client Negotiations', 29 J. Acct. Res. (1991) p. 31
25. R. Smith and I. Walter, 'Institutional Investors hold the key to better governance', Financial Times, 21 July 2003; and infra Parts III and IV.A.
26. P. Betts, 'OECD urges more investor protection', Financial Times, 12 January 2004.
27. A. Rashad Abdel-Khalik, 'Reforming Corporate Governance Post Enron: Shareholders' Board of Trustees and the Auditor', 21 J. Acct. & Pub. Policy (2001) p. 97.
28. K. Lannoo and A. Khachaturyan, 'Reform of Corporate Governance in the EU', CEPS Policy Brief No. 38 (October 2003)
29. K. Hopt, 'Modern Company and Capital Market Problems. Improving European Corporate Governance After Enron', European Corporate Governance Institute Law Working Paper No. 05/2002 (2002).
30. Ontario Securities Commission [hereinafter, OSC] Rule 51-501, 'AIF and MD&A', 23 O.S.C.B (2000) p. 7289 at p. 8311.
31. the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, Report of the Commission to Study the Public's Expectations of Audits (Toronto 1988) p. 21 [hereinafter, CICA Report].
32. CICA Report, supra note 20, at p. 21.
33. A. Levitt, 'The Numbers Game' (Remarks at NYU Centre for Law and Business, New York, 28 September 1998), available online at: < http://accounting.rutgers.edu/raw/aaa/news-arc/pr101898.htm > (last accessed: 6 November 2003).
34. W.H. Beaver, 'What Have We Learned from the Recent Corporate Scandals That We Did Not Already Know?', 8 Stan.J.L.Bus. & Fin. (2002) p. 155 at p. 159;
35. S. Richardson, I. Tuna and M. Wu, 'Predicting Earnings Management: The Case of Earnings Restatements' (2002) p. 8 [unpublished, archived at The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania].
36. M.F. McNichols, 'Research Design Issues in Earnings Management Studies', 19 J. Acct. & Pub. Policy (2000) p. 313
37. W.H. Beaver, 'Perspectives on Recent Capital Market Research', 77 Acct. Rev. (2002) p. 453.
38. J.C. Coffee, Jr., 'The Acquiescent Gatekeeper: Reputational Intermediaries, Auditor Independence and the Governance of Accounting', Columbia Law and Economics Working Paper No. 191 (May 2001), available online at: < http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract-id=270944 > (last accessed: 7 November 2003).
39. J.C. Coffee, Jr., 'Understanding Enron: It's About the Gatekeepers, Stupid', Columbia Law and Economics Working Paper No. 207 (July 2002), available online at: < http://ssrn.com/abstract-id=325240 > (last accessed: 7 November 2003).
40. R. Kraakman, 'Gatekeepers: The Anatomy of a Third-Party Enforcement Strategy', 2 J.L.Econ. & Org. (1986) p. 53;
41. S. Choi, 'Market Lessons for Gatekeepers', 92 N.W.U.L.Rev. (1998) p. 116.
42. R. J. Gilson and R.H. Kraakman, 'The Mechanisms of Market Efficiency', 70 Va.L.Rev. (1984) p. 549.
43. The Handbook of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, loose-leaf (Toronto, Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants 1983) [hereinafter, CICA Handbook].
44. J. Ronen, 'Post-Enron Reform: Financial Statement Insurance, and GAAP Re-visited', 8 Stan.J.L.Bus. & Fin. (2002) p. 39 at p. 46:
45. Hercules Management Ltd. v. Ernst & Young [1997] 2 S.C.R. 165, at p. 171 [hereinafter, Hercules]
46. Caparo Industries plc v. Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 [hereinafter, Caparo]
47. S. Mayson, D. French and C. Ryan, Company Law, 20th edn. (Oxford, OUP 2003) pp. 279-285.
48. M. Gibbins and A.K. Mason, Professional Judgment in Financial Reporting (Toronto, Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants 1988);
49. R. Magee and M. Tseng, 'Audit Pricing and Independence', 65 Acct. Rev. (1990) p. 315.
50. CICA Handbook, supra note 27, at para. 5100.
51. CICA Report, supra note 20, at p. 23.
52. Re City Equitable Fire Insurance Company Ltd. [1925] 1 Ch. 407 [1924] All ER 485 (Ch. Div.), aff'd [1925] 1 Ch. 500 (C.A.) [hereinafter, Re City]
53. W. Gray, ed., The 1999 Annotated Canada Business Corporations Act (Scarborough, ON, Carswell 1999) p. 235.
54. Denning LJ in Fomento (Sterling Area) Ltd v. Selsdon Fountain Pen Co. [1958] 1 All ER 11 [1958]
55. 1 WLR 45
56. Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance (London, Gee 1992) [hereinafter, Cad-bury Report]
57. W. Ebke, 'Corporate Governance and the Independent Auditor: The Battle of the Private versus the Public Interest', in G. Ferrarini, K. Hopt, J. Winter and E. Wymeersch, eds., Modern Company and Takeover Law in Europe (Oxford, OUP forthcoming 2004)
58. Cadbury Report, supra note 34, at para. 5.4
59. United States v. Arthur Young & Co., 465 U.S. 805 (1984) at pp. 817-818
60. L. Linklater, 'Auditors: The Public Watchdog', 22 Company Lawyer (2000) p. 33.
61. US General Accounting Office, 'Financial Statement Restatements: Trends, Market Impacts, Regulatory Responses, and Remaining Challenges' (October 2002), available online at: < http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03138.pdf > (last accessed: 7 November 2003) [hereinafter, General Accounting Report].
62. 2003 Smith Audit Committee Report, supra note 5, at p. 2
63. 2003 CGAA Report, supra note 5, at p. 5.
64. A.A. Berle and G.C. Means, The Modern Corporation and Private Property, rev. edn. (New York, Harcourt, Brace & World 1968) p. viii.
65. B.S. Black, 'Shareholder Passivity Reexamined', 89 Mich.L.Rev. (1990) p. 520 at pp. 567-570.
66. F.H. Easterbrook and D.R. Fischel, 'Voting in Corporate Law', 26 J.L. & Econ. (1983) p. 395 at p. 402;
67. M. Lipton, 'Corporate Governance in the Age of Finance Corporatism', 136 U. Pa.L.Rev. (1987) p. 1 at pp. 66-67;
68. G.W. Dent, Jr., 'Toward Unifying Ownership and Control in the Public Corporation', Wis.L.Rev. (1989) p. 881;
69. S.M. Bainbridge, 'Independence Directors and the ALI Corporate Governance Project', 61 G.W.L.R. (1993) p. 1034 at p. 1055;
70. J. Garrido and A. Rojo, 'Institutional Investors and Corporate Governance: Solution or Problem?', in K. Hopt and E. Wymeersch, eds., Capital Markets and Company Law (Oxford, OUP 2002) p. 427.
71. J.G. Macintosh, 'The Role of Institutional and Retail Investors in Canadian Capital Markets', 31 Osgoode Hall L.J. (1993) p. 371 at pp. 380-383.
72. R. Romano, 'Less is More: Making Institutional Investor Activism a Valuable Mechanism of Corporate Governance', 18 Yale Journal of Regulation (2001) p. 174
73. M. Roe, 'A Political Theory of American Corporate Finance', 91 Co.L.Rev. (1991) p. 10;
74. J.C. Coffee, Jr., 'Liquidity versus Control: The Institutional Investor as Corporate Monitor', 91 Co.L.Rev. (1991) p. 1277;
75. B. Cheffins and R. Thomas, 'Should Shareholders Have a Greater Say over Executive Pay? Learning from the US Experience', 1 J.C. L.S. (2001) p. 277.
76. CCGG, 'Institutional investors form coalition to fight for improved corporate governance', press release (27 June 2002), available online at: < http://www.ccgg.ca/web/website.nsf web/ccggreleasel > (last accessed: 12 November 2003).
77. < http://www.icgn.org/documents/ShareComm-Guidelines.pdf > (last accessed: 15 January 2004).
78. < http://www.abi.org.uk/Display/File/38/Statement-of-Principles.pdf > (last accessed: 10 December 2003).
79. International Corporate Governance Network's Statement on Institutional Shareholder Responsibilities (September 2003), available online at: < http://www.icgn.org/documents/ShareComm-Guidelines.pdf > (last accessed: 15 January 2004).
80. K. Griffiths, 'The Face of Corporate Britain', The Independent, 24 April 2003.
81. T. Tassell, 'Big investors pledge to step up activism', Financial Times, 22 October 2002.
82. D. Sabbagh and R. Miles, 'Shareholder revolution spreads', The Times, 22 October 2003.
83. S. Tucker, 'Warring parties to set out terms in clubland bash', Financial Times, 29 March 2004.
84. J. Taber, 'Hard-Liner Fought Banks and Won: Bouchard's Nemesis Called "Robin Hood" for Court Battle for Shareholders' Rights', National Post, 13 January 2001, p. A6;
85. S. Scott, 'Corporate Crusader and Gadfly: Bob Verdun Jumps at Every Chance to Show CEOs the Error of Their Ways', National Post, 31 August 2002, p. B8;
86. T. Corcoran, 'Vote the Banks Out of Politics', National Post, 14 January 1999, p. C7.
87. E. Ferran, 'The Role of the Shareholder in Internal Corporate Governance: Shareholder Information, Communication and Decision-Making', in Ferrarini et al., op. cit. note 36.
88. 2003 CGAA Report, supra note 5, at p. 37.
89. M.H. Bazerman, K.R Morgan and G. Loewenstein, 'The Impossibility of Auditor Independence', Sloan Mgmt.Rev. (1997) p. 89 at p. 90:
90. D.A. Moore, G. Lowenstein and M.H. Bazerman, 'Auditor Independence, Conflict of Interest and the Unconscious Intrusion of Bias', GSIA Working Paper 2002-19 (2002);
91. R. Prentice, 'The Case of the Irrational Auditor: A Behavioral Insight into Securities Fraud Litigation', 95 Northwestern University Law Review (2000) p. 133.
92. CICA Report, supra note 20, at p. 25
93. A. Anand, 'Shareholders Deserve More', Financial Post, 20 May 2003, p. FP13.
94. B. Welling et al., Corporate Law and Cases, Notes and Material (Toronto, Butterworths 2001) p. 50
95. J.S. Whisenant and S. Sankaraguruswamy, 'Evidence on the Auditor and Client Relationship: What Can Be Learned from Reasons Reported by Managers for Changing Auditors?' (January 2000) p. 4 [unpublished];
96. K.B. Schwartz and B.S. Soo, 'The Association between Auditor Changes and Reporting Lags', 13 Contemp. Acct. Research (1996) p. 353 at p. 361
97. K. Schwartz and K. Menon, 'Auditor Switches by Failing Firms', 60 Acct. Rev. (1985) p. 248;
98. J. Krishnan, 'Auditor Switching and Conservatism', 69 Acct. Rev. (1994) p. 200;
99. Aberdeen Railway Co. v. Blaikie, H.L. 1854, 1 Macq. 461;
100. Beatty v. Northwest Transportation Co., 5 Can.L.T 277
101. L. Bebchuk, J. Fried and D. Walker, 'Managerial Power and Rent Extraction in the Design of Executive Compensation', 69 U.Chi.L.R. (2002) p. 751.
102. UK Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 [hereinafter, FSMA], s. 90.
103. General Accounting Report, supra note 41, at p. 2.
104. L.E. Turner, 'Speech by SEC Staff: The State of Financial Reporting Today: An Unfinished Chapter II', Third Annual SEC Disclosure and Accounting Conference (New York, 7 June 2001)
105. MicroStrategy, Cendant and Sunbeam. Turner et al., 'Accounting Restatements', Working Paper, SEC and Ohio State University (2002) [unpublished]
106. M. Larkin, 'Is the Top Line Right? Revenue Recognition Under Scrutiny', Deloitte Management Briefing (December 2003), available online at: < http://www.deloitte.com > (last accessed: 1 February 2004).
107. A. Rosen, 'The Safety Net Myth', 75:7 Canadian Business (14 April 2003) p. 27, available online at: < http://www.accountabilityresearch.com/documents/media/Apr-14-03-safety-Net-Myth.pdf > (last accessed: 12 November 2003).
108. Haig v. Bamford et al. [1976] 72 D.L.R. (3d) 68.
109. J.E. Sexton and J.W. Stevens, 'Accountants' Legal Responsibilities and Liabilities', in Meredith Memorial Lectures: Professional Responsibility in Civil Law and Common Law, Faculty of Law, McGill University, 1983-84 (Don Mills, ON, Richard De Boo 1985) p. 88;
110. I.F. Ivankovich, 'Accountants and Third-Party Liability: Back to the Future', 23 Ottawa L.Rev. (1991) p. 505.
111. European Union (2000) [hereinafter, Commission Civil Liability Study] p. 6.
112. Sased Finance Ltd (in liquidation) v. KPMG [2000] 1 All ER 676;
113. Equitable Life Assurance Society v. Ernst & Young [2003] EWCA Civ. 114.
114. H.B. Wiener, 'Common Law Liability of the Certified Public Accountant for Negligent Misrepresentation', 20 San Diego L.Rev. (1983) p. 233.
115. B.R. Cheffins, 'Auditors' Liability in the House of Lords: A Signal Canadian Courts Should Follow', 18 C.B.L.J. (1991) p. 118 at p. 126.
116. Department of Trade and Industry, Consultation on Director and Auditor Liability (December 2003) para. 3.7 [hereinafter, DTI Auditor Liability Consultation].
117. T. Tassell, 'Warning on improved protection for auditors', Financial Times, 20 September 2003.
118. W.F. Ebke, 'In Search of Alternatives: Comparative Reflections on Corporate Governance and the Independent Auditor's Responsibilities', 79 N.W.U.L.Rev. (1984) p. 663 at pp. 682 and 684;
119. T.E. Bilek, 'Accountants' Liability to the Third Party and Public Policy: A Calabresi Approach', 39 S.W.L.J. (1985) p. 689 at p. 704;
120. R. Baxt, 'The Modern Company Auditor: A Bloodhound Without Teeth or a Watchdog Without Eyes?', 42 Osgoode Hall L.J. (1986) p. 667 at p. 695.
121. C. Pacini, W. Hillison, R. Alagiah and S. Gunz, 'Commonwealth Convergence Toward a Narrower Scope of Auditor Liability to Third Parties for Negligent Misstatements', 38 Abacus (2002) p. 425.
122. C. Witting, 'Justifying Liability to Third Parties for Negligent Misstatement', O.J. L.S. (2000) p. 615;
123. Cadbury Report, supra note 34, at paras. 5.31-5.33.
124. JEB Fasteners Ltd v. Marks Bloom & Co. [1981] 3 All ER 289.
125. Denning LJ in Candler v. Crane, Christmas & Co. [1951] 2 K.B. 164 at p. 181
126. 125 D.L.R. (4th) 353.
127. P. Anisman, 'Investors Need More Protection Against Negligent Auditing', Financial Post, 10 June 1997, p. 13:
128. A. Rosen, 'Auditors Not Legally Liable to Investors, Top Court Rules', Financial Post, 24 May 1997, p. 3:
129. 'Editorial Opinion', Financial Post, 27 May 1997, p. 18.
130. R. Ewert, E. Feess and M. Neill, 'Auditor Liability Rules Under Imperfect Information and Costly Litigation: The Welfare-increasing Effect of Liability Insurance', 9 European Accounting Review (2003) p. 371
131. Kripps v. Touche Ross [1997] 6 W.W.R. 421
132. 33 B.C.L.R. (39) 254 (CA.).
133. J. Swan, B. Reiter and N. Bala, Contract Law: Cases, Notes and Materials, 6th edn. (Toronto, Butterworths 2002) pp. 680-681;
134. J. Blackier and M. Paskell-Mede, 'Auditor Liability in Canada: The Past, Present and Future', 48 U.N.B.L.J. (1999) p. 65.
135. Morgan Crucible Co. plc v. Hill Samuel Bank [1991] Ch. 2995.
136. Royal Bank of Scotland plc v. Bannerman [2003] SLT 181
137. ADT Limited v. BDO Binder Hamlyn [1996] BCC 808
138. Parna v. G. & S Properties Ltd. [1970] 15 D.L.R. (3d) 336 at 34 (S.C.C.).
139. Derry v. Peek [1889] 14 App. Cas. 337.
140. P. Anisman, 'Comments on Class Proceedings, Securities Market Liability and the CSA Proposal', in Selected Topics in Corporate Litigation: Proceedings of the Queen's Annual Business Law Symposium (Kingston, ON, Queen's Printer 2001) p. 111 at p. 115:
141. P. Sikka, 'Resisting the Auditing Industry: The Case of the Sound Diffusion Action Group', 27 Accounting Forum (2003) p. 201.
142. J.A. Campion, 'Misrepresentation in Class Proceedings: The Cardozo Nightmare?', in Selected Topics in Corporate Litigation: Proceedings of the Queen's Annual Business Law Symposium (Kingston, ON, Queen's Printer 2001) p. 70.
143. CPA, supra note 111, at s. 5(1).
144. P.D.S. Jackson, 'Comment: Misrepresentation in Securities Class Proceedings - How Close Are We to Doing Away with the Issue of Reliance?', in Selected Topics in Corporate Litigation: Proceedings of the Queen's Annual Business Law Symposium (Kingston, ON, Queen's Printer 2001) p. 132.
145. CPA, supra note 111, at s. 5(1).
146. Abdool v. Anaheim Management Ltd. [1995] 21 O.R. (3d) 4534 (Div. Ct.).
147. Williams v. The Mutual Life Assurance Company of Canada [2000] 51 O.R. (3d) 54;
148. Zicherman v. The Equitable Life Insurance Company of Canada [2000] O.J. No. 5144
149. Campbell v. Flexwatt Corp. [1997] 15 C.P.C. (4th) 1 (B.C.C.A.)
150. Anderson v. Wilson [1999] 44 O.R. (3d) 673
151. Carom et al v. Bre-X Minerals Ltd. et al. [1999] 44 O.R. (3d) 173 (S Ct).
152. Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, 421 U.S. 723 (1975).
153. Nicholl Paskell-Mede (NPM), 'Fraud on the Market? Not in Canada', The Canadian D&O Liability Reports (January 1999), available online at: < http://www.encon.ca/English/lcb/bulletins/display.cfm?ID=77 > (last accessed: 25 May 2003).
154. [1843] 2 Hare 460
155. 67 E.R. 189.
156. CBCA, supra note 18, at s. 239(1).
157. OBCA, supra note 18, at s. 246(1);
158. QCA, supra note 18, at s. 123;
159. BCCA, supra note 18, at s. 201(1).
160. OBCA, supra note 18, at s. 247;
161. CBCA, supra note 18, at s. 240.
162. BCCA, supra note 18, at s. 201(4).
163. J.G. Fleming, 'The Negligent Auditor and Shareholders', 106 L.Q.R. (1990) p. 349 at p. 352.
164. Kaplan v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., 529 A.2d 254 (Del. Ch. Ct. 1987), 540 A.2d 726 (Del. S. Ct. 1988)
165. G.M. Berne and M.A. Friel, 'Common Law and State Law Claims: What's Left After SLUSA', 1309 PLI/Corp (2002) p. 109 at p. 112.
166. Edwards v. Halliwell [1950] 2 All ER 1964.
167. Wallersteiner v. Moir [1975] QB 373.
168. CBCA, supra note 18, at s. 241(1).
169. OBCA, supra note 18, at s. 248(1);
170. QCA, supra note 18, at s. 123;
171. BCCA, supra note 18, at s. 200(1).
172. CA 1985, supra note 18, at s. 459.
173. Budd v. Centra Inc. [1996] OJ No. 3515 (1998)
174. 43 B.L.R. (2d) 27 (Ont. C.A.)
175. J. Chapman, 'An Alternative to Common Law Misrepresentation Claims', in Selected Topics in Corporate Litigation: Proceedings of the Queen's Annual Business Law Symposium (Kingston, ON, Queen's Printer 2001) p. 128, who makes a similar argument.
176. Quinlan v. Essex Hinge Co. Ltd [1996] 2 BCLC 417.
177. W.M.H. Grover and J.C. Baillie, 'Disclosure Requirements', in Proposals for a Securities Market Law for Canada, Vol. 3 (Ottawa, Consumer and Corporate Affairs 1979) p. 349.
178. remarks of M. Singletary at Investor Summit, US Securities and Exchange Commission, 10 May 2002, available online at: SEC < http://www.sec.gov/investor/summit/isummit051002.htm > (last accessed: 10 November 2003)
179. H. Kripke, 'The Myth of the Informed Layman', 28 The Business Lawyer (1973) p. 631.
180. R. Prentice, 'Whither Securities Regulation? Some Behavioural Observations Regarding Proposals for Its Future', 51 Duke Law Journal (2002) p. 1397.
181. J. Winsen, 'Investor Behavior and Information', 11 J.Fin. & Quantitative Analysis (1976) p. 13 at p. 14.
182. K. Firtel, 'Plain English: A Reappraisal of the Intended Audience of Disclosure Under the Securities Act of 1933', 72 S.Cal.L.Rev. (1998) pp. 851 at pp. 854-862)
183. H.L. Pitt, 'Written Testimony Concerning Accounting and Investor Protection Issues Raised by Enron and Other Public Companies' (testimony before the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs of the US Senate, 21 March 2002) p. 12, available online at: < http://www.sec.gov/news/testimony/032102tshlp.htm > (last accessed: 30 April 2003).
184. OSC Rule 52-501, 'Financial Statements', 23 O.S.C.B. (2000) p. 8372 at s. 2.2(6) and (7).
185. A. Parker, 'Top Accountant Disapproves of EU Proposals', Financial Times, 9 November 2003. It now appears that the quarterly reporting requirement will be optional (Commission Press Release IP/04/398).
186. Five Year Review Committee, Draft Report: Reviewing the Securities Act (Ontario) (Ontario, Ministry of Finance 2002), available online at: < http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/en/Summary/sra-c-5yr-draft-report-20020529.htm > (last accessed: 10 November 2003).
187. CICA Report, supra note 20
188. Cadbury Report, supra note 34.
189. Hereinafter, 2003 Audit Bill, available online at: < http://www.dti.gov.uk/cld/companies-audit-etc-bill/index.htm > (last accessed: 10 December 2003).
190. Explanatory Notes to Companies (Audit, Investigations and Community Enterprise) Bill, para. 53, available online at: < http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldbills/008/2004008.htm > (last accessed: 10 December 2003).
191. 2003 Smith Audit Committee Report, supra note 5, at para. 5.9.
192. See, e.g., SOX, supra note 4, at ss. 103, 302 and 906.
193. 2003 CGAA Report, supra note 5, at para. 2.28.
194. V. Brudney, 'The Independent Director: Heavenly City or Potemkin Village?', 95 Harv.L.Rev. (1982) p. 597.
195. S. Bhagat and B. Black, 'The Uncertain Relationship between Board Composition and Firm Performance', 54 Bus.Law. (1999) p. 921;
196. S. Bhagat and B. Black, The Non-Correlation between Board Independence and Long Term Firm Performance, 27 J.Corp.L. (2001) p. 231.
197. R.C. Hanson and M.H. Song, 'Managerial Ownership, Board Performance and the Division of Gains in Divestitures', 6 J. Corp.Finance (2000) p. 55;
198. L. Bebchuk, J. Coates and G. Subramanian, 'The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Theory, Evidence and Policy', 54 Stan.L.Rev. (2002) p. 887;
199. L. Bebchuk, J. Coates and G. Subramanian, 'The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Further Findings and a Reply to Symposium Participants', Stan.L.Rev. (2002) p. 885.
200. A. Agrawal and S. Chadha, 'Corporate Governance and Accounting Scandals', AFA 2004 San Diego Meetings (July 2003), available online at: < http://ssrn.com/abstract=361820 > (last accessed: 17 December 2003).
201. L. Spira. 'Audit Committees: begging the question', 11 Corporate Governance (2003) p. 180.
202. Proposed Multilateral Instrument 58-101, 'Disclosure of Governance Practices', available online at: < http://www.osc.gov.on.ca >.
203. The CSA has also proposed Multilateral Policy 58-201, 'Effective Corporate Governance'
204. Combined Code, supra note 21, at para. D.3.1.
205. L. Bebchuk, 'Shareholder Access to the Ballot', John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics and Business Discussion Paper No. 428 (August 2003) p. 15
206. Securities and Exchange Commission, 'Proposed Rule: Security Holder Director Nominations', 17 C.F.R. Parts 240, 249 and 274 [Release Nos. 34-48626, IC-26206; File No. S7-19-03 RIN 3235-AI93].
207. 2003 CGAA Report, supra note 5, at para. 2.28.
208. CSA Companion Policy, supra note 168, at p. 5007.
209. G. Livingston, 'Investors Aim to Hold Companies Responsible: One Voice: Pension and Mutual Funds Join Forces to Push for Changes', National Post, 15 July 2002, p. MF2.
210. M. Becht and C. Mayer, 'Introduction', in F. Barca and M. Becht, The Control of Corporate Europe (Oxford, OUP 2001) p. 26.
211. M. Bertrand and S. Mullainathan, Agents With and Without Principals, Amer.Econ.Rev. (2000) pp. 203 and 204
212. CSA Rule, supra note 2, at s. 2.3;
213. SOX, supra note 4, at s. 301(2);
214. Combined Code, supra note 21, at para. D.3.2(b) and (e).
215. CSA Rule, supra note 2, at s. 3.1;
216. SOX, supra note 4, at s. 301(3)(ii);
217. Combined Code, supra note 21, at paras. A.3.1. and C.3.1.
218. 2003 CGAA Report, supra note 5, at para. 1.6.
219. CBCA, supra note 18, at ss. 166(1) and 166(3)
220. CA 1985, supra note 18, at s. 388(1)
221. OBCA, supra note 18, at s. 149(1).
222. CBCA, supra note 18, at s. 168(5).
223. OBCA, supra note 18, at s. 149(6);
224. BCCA, supra note 18, at s. 185(3).
225. CBCA, supra note 18, at s. 168(6).
226. OBCA, supra note 18, at s. 149(6);
227. BCCA, supra note 18, at s. 185(3).
228. CBCA, supra note 18, at s. 168(1).
229. CA 1985, supra note 18, at s. 391A.
230. Jarvis plc v. PricewaterhouseCoopers [2000] 2 BCLC 368.
231. 2003 Audit Bill, supra note 152, at Ch. 1, clause 7.
232. Explanatory Notes, supra note 157, at para. 31.
233. Combined Code, supra note 21, at para. D.3.4.
234. CICA Handbook, supra note 27, at s. 5751.
235. I. Ivankovich, 'A Question of Privilege: Confidential Communications and the Public Accountant', 23 C.B.L.J. (1994) p. 201 at pp. 220-222 and 232-233:
236. Missiaen v. M.N.R. [1967] 68 D.T.C. 5039 (Alta. S. Ct.);
237. R. v. Gruenke [1991] 3 S.C.R. 263, 67 C.C.C. (3d) 289;
238. CBCA, supra note 18, at s. 137(1)(a).
239. OBCA, supra note 18, at s. 99(1)(a);
240. QCA, supra note 18, at s. 99(1);
241. BCCA, supra note 18, at s. 147(2).
242. CBCA, supra note 18, at ss. 137(5) and 137(5.1).
243. OBCA, supra note 18, at ss. 99(5) and 99(7).
244. The Combined Code, supra note 21, provides in para. D.1.1
245. T. Tassell, 'Shareholders and business sing same song over board reforms', Financial Times, 24 July 2003.
246. CBCA, supra note 18, at s. 168(2).
247. OBCA, supra note 18, at s. 151(2);
248. BCCA, supra note 18, at s. 193.
249. CBCA, supra note 18, at s. 143(1).
250. OBCA, supra note 18, at s. 105(1);
251. QCA, supra note 18, at s. 99(1);
252. BCCA, supra note 18, at s. 147(1).
253. The British Columbia Securities Commission published a response to the CSA Rules on 24 September 2003, available online at: < http://www.bcsc.bc.ca/Publications/Hyndman-OSC.pdf > (last accessed: 10 November 2003)
254. CICA, Public Interest and Integrity Committee, 'Exposure Draft: Independence Standards', available online at: < http://www.cica.ca/multimedia/Download-Library/Public-Interest/Independence.pdf > (last accessed: 10 November 2003).
255. CICA, 'Protecting the Public Interest: Independence Standards', media release, available online at: < http://www.cica.ca/index.cfm/ci-id/7755/la-id/1.htm > (last accessed: 21 May 2003).
256. Canadian Securities Administrators, Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) and Chartered Accountants of Canada, 'New Independent Public Oversight for Auditors of Public Companies Announced by Federal and Provincial Regulators and Canada's Chartered Accountants', media release (17 July 2002), available online at: < http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/en/About/News/NewsReleases/2002/nr-20020717-csa-osfi-cica-public-oversight.htm > (last accessed: 13 November 2003).
257. Canadian Securities Administrators, Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) and Chartered Accountants of Canada, 'Requirements for CA Firms that Audit Public Companies', media release (17 July 2002), available online at: < http://www.icao.on.ca/multimedia/PDFs/COM/press-releases/3require.pdf > (last accessed: 13 November 2003).
258. SOX, supra note 2, at ss. 101-109.
259. 2003 Regulatory Review Report, supra note 5, at para. 1.8.
260. BDO Seidman, LLP, 'Re: Release No. 33-8154 Strengthening the Commission's Requirements Regarding Auditor Independence; File No. S7-49-02' (13 January 2003) para. 10, available online at: < http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s74902/bdoseidman1.htm#P72-7615 > (last accessed: 10 November 2003);
261. J. McCaffery, 'Is Auditor Rotation Coming?' CFO Magazine, available online at: < http://www.cfo.eom/article/1,5309,7269%7C%7CS%7C1%7C344,00.html > (last accessed: 10 November 2003);
262. E. Henry, 'Jail Terms for Lying Execs a Step Closer', available online at: < http://moneycentral.msn.com/articles/news/capitol/9974.asp > (last accessed: 10 November 2003).
263. G. Burns, 'Accounting's Power Slips into Loss Column', Chicago Tribune, 10 November 2002, available online at: < http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/showcase/chi-0211100536nov10,0,2329323.story?coll=chi-newsspecials-hed > (last accessed: 10 November 2003);
264. O. Kirtley, 'Wall Street Reform' The NewsHour (August 2002) paras. 13-15, available online at: < http://www.pbs.org/news-hour/forum/july02/b-ethics8.html > (last accessed: 10 November 2003).
265. J.N. Myers, L.A. Myers and T.C. Omer, 'Exploring the Term of the Auditor-Client Relationship and the Quality of Earnings: A Case for Mandatory Auditor Rotation?', 78 Acc.Rev. (2003) p. 779 at p. 780.
266. 2003 CGAA Report, supra note 5, at para. 1.27.
267. Auditing Practices Board, 'Draft Ethical Standards for Auditors', Consultation Paper (November 2003) Ethical Standard 3 at paras. 10 and 14.
268. See 2003 CGAA Report, supra note 5, at para. 1.20.
269. M. Gietzmann and P. Sen, 'Improving Auditor Independence through Selective Mandatory Rotation', 6 International Journal of Auditing (2002).
270. E.A. Imhoff, 'Accounting Quality, Auditing and Corporate Governance', Working Paper (January 2003) p. 16:
271. SDA Universita Bocconi, The Impact of Mandatory Rotation on Audit Quality and on Audit Pricing - The Case of Italy (2002).
272. D. Dombey and A. Parker, 'EU Audit Changes Proposed After Parmalat Scandal', Financial Times, 3 February 2004.
273. A. Vanstraelen, 'Impact of renewable long-term audit mandates on audit quality', 9 European Accounting Review (2000) p. 419.
274. Canadian Bankers Association (CBA), 'The Perspective of Canadian Chartered Banks on An Act respecting Banks and Banking (Bill C-95)', evidence submitted to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance (8 March 1991) para. 21.
275. 'Manila Orders Banks to Change Auditors Every Five Years' Pacific Business News, 19 August 2002, available online at: < http://pacific.bizjournals.com/pacific/stories/2002/08/19/daily5.html > (last accessed: 10 November 2003).
276. CICA Report, supra note 20, at p. 25.
277. 2003 CGAA Report, supra note 5, at para. 1.27;
278. B. Arruñada and. C Paz-Ares, 'Mandatory rotation of company auditors: a critical examination', 17 International Review of Law and Economics (1997) p. 31.
279. F. Harding, 'What is the role of Europe in an increasingly harmonized world?', 9 European Accounting Review (2000) p. 593.
280. OJ 1996 C321/1.
281. OJ 1998 C143/12.
282. OJ 2002 L191/22.
283. 2003 EU Company Law Action Plan, supra note 2, at p. 3.
284. 2003 EU Company Law Action Plan, supra note 2, at para. 3.1.1.
285. Winter Report, supra note 2, at p. 71.
286. Statutory Audit Proposal, supra note 5, at Arts. 39 and 43.
287. Winter Report, supra note 2, at p. 61.
288. 2003 EU Company Law Action Plan, supra note 2, at para. 3.1.3;
289. Statutory Audit Proposal, supra note 5, at Art. 43.
290. Statutory Audit Proposal, supra note 5, at Art. 35.
291. 2003 EU Company Law Action Plan, supra note 2, at para. 3.1.1 Compulsion of institutional investor voice has been rejected given the dangers of 'box-ticking' (ibid.).
292. Statutory Audit Proposal, supra note 5, at Art. 38.
293. 2003 EU Statutory Audit Action Plan, supra note 5, at p. 3.
294. Statutory Audit Proposal, supra note 5, at Art. 40(c).
295. ICAEW Press Release of 16 March 2004, available online at: < http://www.icaew.co.uk > (last accessed: 29 March 2004).
296. Statutory Audit Proposal, supra note 5, at Arts. 23-25.
297. Statutory Audit Proposal, supra note 5, at Art. 31.
298. Corporate Governance Committee, 'Dutch Corporate Governance Code: Principles of Good Corporate Governance and Best Practice Provisions' (2003).
299. W. Bratton and J. McCahery, 'Comparative Corporate Governance and the Theory of the Firm: The Case Against Global Cross Reference', 38 Co.J.Transnat'l.L (1999) p. 213 at pp. 222-228;
300. M. Bradley, C. Schipani, A. Sundaram and J. Walsh, 'The Purposes and Accountability of the Corporation in Contemporary Society: Corporate Governance at a Crossroads', 62 L&CP (1999) p. 9 at pp. 61-64.
301. M. Roe, 'Some Differences in Corporate Structure in Germany, Japan, and the United States', 102 Y.L.J. (1993) p. 1927 at pp. 1979-1981.
302. Winter Report, supra note 2, at p. 60.
303. G. Hertig, 'Western Europe's Corporate Governance Dilemma', in T. Baums, K. Hopt and N. Horn, eds., Corporations, Capital Markets and Business in the Law (The Hague, Kluwer 2000) p. 265 at p. 267.
304. K. Hopt, 'Common Principles of Governance in Europe' in J. McCahery, P. Moerland, T. Raaijmakers and L. Renneboog, eds., Corporate Governance Regimes. Convergence and Divergence (Oxford, OUP 2002) p. 175 at pp. 184-186.
305. Dutch Corporate Governance Code, supra note 261, at Preamble, 3.
306. Statutory Audit Proposal, supra note 5, at p. 2.
307. Green Paper, supra note 238, at p. 4.
308. Commission Civil Liability Study, supra note 82, at p. 7.
309. C. Baker, A. Mikol and R. Quick, 'Regulation of the statutory auditor in the European Union: a comparative survey of the United Kingdom, France and Germany', 10 European Accounting Review (2001) p. 763.
310. Statutory Audit Proposal, supra note 5, at Art. 36
311. Winter Report, supra note 2, at p. 70.