Price Waterhouse v Kwan
| 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]
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.
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 . |
Categories:
- Court of Appeal of New Zealand cases
- New Zealand tort case law
- 2003 in New Zealand law
- 2003 in case law
- PricewaterhouseCoopers
- New Zealand case law stubs