英语论文网

artners in the business consulting divisions of Arthur Ng & Son. Required: Advise Chubb whether it has any valid grounds for refusing to indemnify the auditors in respect of the claim by the Central Bank. NOTE – you can assume that the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cwth of Australia) does not apply to this policy. [10 marks – 600 word limit] Question 6 Big Hungry Profitmaker Ltd (‘BHP’) is a public corporation with a diverse range of interests in existing and proposed business ventures across the Asia Pacific region, including the following: · An open cut gold and copper mine in the Phillipines which has been criticised for heavy metal contamination of local waterways and destruction of large tracts of rainforest; · Palm oil plantations in Borneo which have been established through illegal burning of rainforest which has displaced endangered populations of orang-utan and the traditional hunting and gathering lifestyle of indigenous peoples. · A proposal to construct a pulp mill in northern Tasmania, which is opposed because it is not planned to adopt best practice ‘chlorine free’ bleaching processes · A proposal to build a new coal fired power station in southern China using the cheapest and ‘dirtiest’ technology. Assume that you are the Chief Executive officer of BHP. Last night a group of environmental protesters surrounded your home and chanted loudly about your company’s environmental impacts. You also happened to watch Al Gore’s movie ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ and realise that it s time that industry was more proactive in dealing with environmental matters. Required Prepare a report for your Board of Directors of BHP on how to transform the company into a more sustainable corporation, using the above list of activities as a general indication of the types of risks and opportunities faced by the company. [10 marks – 600 word limit] Question 1 According to the fact, it is possible for Walter to take legal action against Li and Qiang. In addition, after paying for Walter’s loss, Qiang has the right to take another legal action against Li for asking for his loss from Li’s misconduct. Since the fact of this case is located in Hong Kong, relative laws of China will be applied in it. Question 4 The issue of this case is whether either the HKEX, or the firm of auditors Arthur Ng and Son owed a duty to take reasonable care to Central Bank [Esanda Finance Corporation Ltd v Peat Marwick Hungerfords (1997) 71 ALJR 448]. The following will prove that Central Bank can bring an action to seek damages for negligent misrepresentation against the firm of auditors Arthur Ng and Son. Firstly, the firm of auditors Arthur Ng and Son owed a duty of care to Central Bank [JEB Fasteners Ltd v Mark Bloom & Co (1981) 3 All ER 289]. Due to the HKEX would rely upon their audit report to make decisions whether take any further action to ENROB, the firm of auditors Arthur Ng and Son's responsibility is to scrutinize the ENROB's accounts to disclose a true and fair reflection of its financial position. Also this audit report is a public document, and so it would be relied upon by Central Bank when they invested. Therefore, though Central Bank is the third party, there is a special relationship between the firm of auditors Arthur Ng and Son and Central Bank. Moreover, the firm of auditors Arthur Ng and Son should be reasonable foreseeable that their audit report would be evidence of the HKEX's decisions and investor