Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
Write 6 pages with APA style on Tort. Other relevant legislations which have been made and may be applicable to this case may also be included in the catchword.The purpose of the catchwords is to help
Write 6 pages with APA style on Tort. Other relevant legislations which have been made and may be applicable to this case may also be included in the catchword.
The purpose of the catchwords is to help one summarise at a glance, the facts surrounding a court case. The same are also used in compiling case reports. Mostly, legal publishers are the ones who make the catchwords as parts of the head notes and summaries surrounding a case.
The key facts are summarised in case reports and are summarised include the head note, the citation of the case and the law reporter. Sometimes, the Latin or law French are mentioned. All these are listed in the line which specifies whether the case is first instance or is on appeal. If this is the case, catchwords may come after the names of the judges and the hearing and judgement dates, respectively. The legal publisher or any person working for legal publisher may write this report or catchword. The part of the report may either be referred to by its self-titled name, catchwords or catchphrases. Apart from the aforementioned facts surrounding the case, the legal publisher will have to specify whether the case is taking place for the first time, or is an appeal or cross appeal.
The key issue on which the court had to decide is the duty of care, and whether or not the defendant had fully met it. In this case, the use of negligent misstatements and negligent preparation of reports for a company serve as key issue. Apart from the general provisions of the common law, it will be important to consider the principle of Hedley Byrne v Heller in constructing a sound verdict.
Initially, the courts made a ruling in favour of the auditors, saying that the auditors did not owe the plaintiffs any duty of care. The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the plaintiff, saying that the auditors owed the plaintiffs duty of care as shareholders.
