论文部分内容阅读
从1996年四川德阳会计师事务所验资案标志着中国注册会计师第一轮诉讼浪潮开始,到2003年1月9日最高人民法院颁布《关于审理证券市场因虚假陈述引发的民事赔偿案件的若干规定》(以下简称《1．9规定》),标志着我国证券民事赔偿制度真正进入司法实践阶段,这期间关于注册会计师对第三方民事责任问题的讨论从未间断过,会计界和法律界存在着分歧,争论的焦点之一就是注册会计师民事责任的归责原则问题,不仅如此,在法律界内部也存在不同的观点。仔细研究这些观点之后不难发现,归责原则的争论其实只是表面现象,其实质是如何看待独立审计准则法律地位的问题,更进一步说,是如何确认注册会计师是否保持了应有职业谨慎的问题。
The verification of capital verification by Sichuan Deyang Certified Public Accountants in 1996 marks the beginning of the first wave of litigation of CPA in China. By January 9, 2003, the Supreme People’s Court promulgated “Certain Provisions on Trial of Civil Compensation Cases Caused by False Statement in Securities Market” (Hereinafter referred to as the “1.9 Provisions”), which indicates that China’s securities civil compensation system has really entered the stage of judicial practice. During this period, the CPA’s discussion of the third party civil liability has never stopped. There are differences between the accounting and legal circles , One of the focuses of the debate is the issue of the principle of imputation of the CPA’s civil liability. Not only that, but also different opinions exist within the legal community. After a careful study of these points of view, it is not hard to see that the debate on the principle of imputation is in fact a superficial phenomenon. The essence of the debate is how to view the legal status of independent auditing standards. Furthermore, how to confirm whether a CPA retains the issue of professional cautiousness .