Search results

In different recent judgments, the Jordanian Court of Cassation, among many other Jordanian Courts, has found that a limited liability company's shareholder may be held liable in addition to the company itself as to claims related to the company's debits and different obligations. While the aforementioned approach does constitute a departure from the well-established former approach that the same Court has followed for a long period, the Court have unsurprisingly brought up different interpretations to the insufficient provisions that the Jordanian Companies' Law no. 22 of the year 1997 does contain pertaining this specific area of law. Accordingly, this paper aims to attempt to point out and critically examine the aforementioned Courts' decisions and law provisions to demonstrate the extent to which limited liability companies in Jordan are truly limited in liability and whether such Courts have pierced the corporate veil for adequate reasons.

To examine the extent to which limited liability companies in Jordan are truly limited in liability, this work uses the most relevant secondary data available in this relation as the main method to complete such examination and this shall include different interrelated law provisions, case law and jurisprudence. Through critically analyzing and comparing such data, this work will identify the problems connected to this specific area of law and accordingly proposes different recommendations and conclusions.

This work submits that the aforementioned Courts and Legislator have not dealt with such a matter in an adequate and comprehensive manner and that they should have addressed this area of law in a different and more specific way. Furthermore, this work argues that while the reasons behind the Courts' decisions shall be respected, the distinct characteristics that brought up limited liability companies into practice shall be also respected and left intact.

Taking into consideration the recent different approach followed by the Jordanian Courts to this specific area of law, and as far as the author is aware, it would not be surprising to say that there is no comprehensive and updated scholarly work which has either examined such an issue or addressed its implications from technical and legal standpoints. This paper receives its originality and value from being the first work that examines and addresses such important matter.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

A limited liability company (LLC) plays an important role in the commercial activities in Kuwait. The majority of companies in Kuwait takes the form of a limited liability. This is due to a number of reasons, namely smallness of the invested capital, its suitability to a middle‐size enterprise and the limited liability of the partners. The LLC was confined to at least two special provisions (prohibition) that differ from other forms of companies. First, Article 187 of the Company Code provides that LLCs ‘may not transact insurance business, banking or the investment of monies for third parties’, and secondly, Article 185(2) states that ‘partners may only be natural persons’. The rationale of these prohibitions is based on the weakness of the financial position and the limited liability of the company, as insurance and investment need a large capital, and on the other hand to prevent holding companies (HCs) from controlling LLCs, and enter into irrational speculation in commercial activities, which may affect the minority of shareholders and the national economy too.

The four sections to this article have distinct but inter‐related objectives. Part I introduces the concepts, problems and tensions central to an understanding of the product liability debate. These issues recur throughout the article. Part II outlines the development of product liability law in Europe and assesses the impact of the European Directive on Product Liability. The “product liability crisis” in the United States is discussed in Part III, which looks at the law's development and proposals for reform. In Part IV the United States and European positions are compared and the case is made out for a global uniform product liability law which recognises the social responsibility of the producer towards those injured by his products.

1.1 What Are Accounts For? Overview The purpose of accounts is to reveal performance in the conduct of a business or other activity concerned with use of economic resources (e.g. a club). It is thus a matter of stewardship. Although, like economics, it is necessary in accounting to use money as a measure of performance, it is concerned with the individual organisation rather than with economic phenomena as a whole.

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

The Hong Kong Society of Accountants proposes to allow incorporating audit practices in Hong Kong. Finds that auditors are anxious about their increasing risk and the legal liabilities of their work, believing that incorporation is the best method to protect their interests. Many auditors believe that the profession should place the public interests at the top but the interests of the profession should also be protected. Therefore incorporation of the audit practice is necessary in Hong Kong, but strict rules should be imposed to prevent abuse. In addition, finds that clients are not concerned about this issue. The bankers will give a lower value to the audited financial statements issued by incorporated audit firms. In implementation, the professional indemnity insurance and the minimal capital requirement will become the key concern of auditors to incorporate their audit firms.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the capital system and governance of Mainland Chain with that of Taiwan.

This a comparative study drawing upon the main principles of the legal systems of China and Taiwan.

Due to historical, institutional social factors, the capital system of the Mainland China differs greatly from that of Taiwan. There is room for both sides across the Taiwan Straits to learn from each other by taking into consideration the respective features and deficiencies of their regulations.

The comparison and contrast study of the two capital systems helps them to improve respectively and boost economic development as well as legal construction.

Examines the legal environment of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA with respect to auditor liability. Provides an understanding of the legal risks to accountants associated with third‐party uses of audited financial statements by contrasting accounting liability for negligent misrepresentation in various US settings with those of the four other nations. Liability pressure has been very acute and litigation in the five countries has increased. Evidence supports a trend towards limiting third‐party liability to accountants.

This paper aims to investigate the relation between audit firms’ switch to limited liability partnership (LLP) from limited liability company (LLC) and client firms’ earnings comparability. If LLP auditors, who have a higher liability exposure than LLC auditors, are more consistent in implementing generally accepted accounting principles and executing firm-wide audit methodologies, client firms’ earnings comparability will increase.

Using data from China, the authors examine whether client firm-pairs of LLP auditors have higher earnings comparability than client firm-pairs of LLC auditors. The authors also perform cross-sectional tests to shed light on the mechanisms through which auditors’ litigation exposure affects client firms’ comparability.

The authors find that firm-pairs in which both firms are audited by LLP auditors exhibit higher earnings comparability than other firm-pairs. This result is stronger when client firms are audited by the same auditor, when client firms are audited by the top 10 auditors and when the auditors are less dependent on the client firms. The authors also document that firm-pairs in which both firms are audited by LLP auditors have lower average analyst earnings forecast error and forecast dispersion.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first to examine the relation between auditor’s litigation exposure and client firms’ earnings comparability. It also extends the literature on audit firm organizational form and audit quality.