| Price Waterhouse v Kwan | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Court of Appeal of New Zealand |
| Full case name | PRICE WATERHOUSE Appellant AND P KWAN AND OTHERS Respondents AND BETWEEN PRICE WATERHOUSE Appellant AND K D HUGHES per N M HUGHES Respondent |
| Decided | 16 December 1999 |
| Citation(s) | [2000] 3 NZLR 39 |
| Transcript(s) | Court of Appeal judgment |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Gault J, Keith J, Tipping J |
| Keywords | |
| negligence | |
Price Waterhouse v Kwan [2000] 3 NZLR 39 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding liability for negligent misstatements.[1]
YouTube Encyclopedic
-
1/2Views:2 0504 037
-
What if leaders fail to navigate cultural complexities? | London Business School
-
2014 Stanford Graduate School of Business Diploma Ceremony
Transcription
Background
Price Waterhouse were the auditors of a law firm. It was later claimed that Price Waterhouse were negligent in their audits resulting in them losing their investments.
Held
As the purpose of the audits was for the protection of clients money, there was sufficient proximity to hold that PW owed them a duty of care, and were accordingly ordered to pay damages.
The previous ruling in the McLaren Maycroft & Co v Fletcher Development Co Ltd case was overturned.
References
- ^ McLay, Geoff (2003). Butterworths Student Companion Torts (4th ed.). LexisNexis. ISBN 0-408-71686-X.
 | This article relating to case law in New Zealand is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
This page was last edited on 24 January 2024, at 03:30