In which case was it held that an auditor did not owe a duty of care to potential shareholders?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

In Caparo Industries plc v Dickman (1990), it was held that an auditor did not owe a duty of care to potential shareholders in relation to the investment decisions they make based on the audited accounts. This case established the three-part Caparo test for duty of care, emphasizing the need for foreseeability, proximity, and that it is fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty of care.

In Which Case Was It Held That an Auditor Did