A reply to Randall E. LaSalle: "The civil justice system and going-concern audit reports: Comments on 'Auditors' decision-making under going-concern uncertainties in low litigation-risk environments: Evidence from Hong Kong' "
Publication in refereed journal

Times Cited
Altmetrics Information

Other information
AbstractIn a dissent from the conclusion reached in Lam and Mensah [Lam, K, Mensah, Y.M., 2006. Auditors' decision-making under going-concern uncertainties in low Litigation-risk environments: Evidence from Hong Kong. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 25 (6), 706-739], Lasalle has proposed a number of alternative plausible explanations for our findings that Hong Kong auditors issued disclaimer of opinions in a manner associated with the eventual outcome to the clients. We examine these explanations and attempt to relate them to relevant empirical evidence in the literature. We find that none of his plausible explanations is consistent with the limited empirical evidence available. Thus, we continue to believe that a high litigation-risk environment is not a necessary pre-requisite for high quality audits. © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
All Author(s) ListLam K.C.K., Mensah Y.M.
Journal nameJournal of Accounting and Public Policy
Volume Number25
Issue Number6
PublisherElsevier BV
Place of PublicationNetherlands
Pages746 - 754
LanguagesEnglish-United Kingdom
KeywordsCivil justice, Disclaimer, Litigation-risk, Regulatory environment

Last updated on 2020-15-11 at 23:58