Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
When the borrower defaulted on the loan, Esanda turned to the auditors to recover claiming it had acted on reliance of audited accounts which breached mandatory accounting standards in relation to preparing the accounts and but for this breach of duty by Peat Marwick Hungerford. Central to this argument was that Esanda had suffered a loss which ...
Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, 544 U.S. 696 (2005), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously overturned accounting firm Arthur Andersen's conviction of obstruction of justice in the fraudulent activities and subsequent collapse of Enron.
Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as an authority for courts when deciding subsequent identical or similar cases. [1] [2] [3] Fundamental to common law legal systems, precedent operates under the principle of stare decisis ("to stand by things decided"), where past judicial decisions serve as case law to guide future rulings, thus promoting consistency and predictability.
These past decisions are called "case law", or precedent. Stare decisis —a Latin phrase meaning "let the decision stand"—is the principle by which judges are bound to such past decisions, drawing on established judicial authority to formulate their positions.
As a general matter, reviewers of the issues of decision uniformity and court diversity take the position that identical sets of facts in a tax case should result in identical court decisions. [17] Reviewers vary on how to achieve that, however. One approach to greater uniformity was taken in the 1943 tax case of Dobson v.
Valuations can be done for assets (for example, investments in marketable securities such as companies' shares and related rights, business enterprises, or intangible assets such as patents, data and trademarks) or for liabilities (e.g., bonds issued by a company). Valuation is a subjective exercise, and in fact, the process of valuation itself ...
Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208 (2014), was a 2014 United States Supreme Court [1] decision about patent eligibility of business method patents. [2] The issue in the case was whether certain patent claims for a computer-implemented, electronic escrow service covered abstract ideas, which would make the claims ineligible for patent protection.
Residual risk is defined in this context as the risk associated with differences between the stochastic inflows of assets into the organization and precedent agents' claims on the organization's cash flows. Precedent agents' claims on an organization's cash flows can consist of e.g. employees' salaries, creditors' interest or the government's ...