This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this articlebyadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Price Waterhouse v Kwan" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (May 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Price Waterhouse v Kwan [2000] 3 NZLR 39 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding liability for negligent misstatements.[1]
| 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 | [2000] 3 NZLR 39 |
| Transcript | Court of Appeal judgment |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Gault J, Keith J, Tipping J |
| Keywords | |
| negligence | |
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.
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.
 | This article relating to case law in New Zealand is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |