ACCA考试《公司法与商法》章节练习(2020-08-12)

发布时间：2020-08-12

备考2020年ACCA考试的小伙伴注意啦，51题库考试学习网为了帮助大家备考，为大家准备了ACCA考试《公司法与商法》的试题，以供大家学习练习。

Question:

In relation to the TORT OF NEGLIGENCE, explain:

(a)the standard of care owed by one person to another;

(b)remoteness of damage.

Answer:

(a)The law does not require unreasonable steps to be taken to avoid breaching a duty of care. In legal terms, a breach of duty of care occurs if the defendant fails:

\'…… to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do; or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.\' (Blyth v BirminghamWaterworks Co (1856))

Thus the fact that the defendant has acted less skilfully than the reasonable person would expect will usually result in a breach being established. This is the case even where the defendant is inexperienced in their particular trade or activity. For example, a learner driver must drive in the manner of a driver of skill, experience and care (Nettleship v Weston (1971)). However, the standard of care expected from a child may be lower than that of an adult (Mullin v Richards (1998)).

Clearly the degree, or standard, of care to be exercised by such a reasonable person will vary depending on circumstances, but the following factors will be taken into consideration in determining the issue:

(i)The seriousness of the risk

The degree of care must be balanced against the degree of risk involved if the defendant fails in their duty. It follows, therefore, that the greater the risk of injury or the more likely it is to occur, the more the defendant will have to do to fulfil their duty. The degree of care to be exercised by the defendant may be increased if the claimant is very young, old or less able bodied in some way. The rule is that \'you must take your victim as you find him\' (this is known as the egg-shell skull rule).

In Haley v London Electricity Board (1965) the defendants, in order to carry out repairs, had made a hole in the pavement. The precautions taken by the Electricity Board were sufficient to safeguard a sighted person, but Haley, who was blind, fell into the hole, striking his head on the pavement, and became deaf as a consequence. It was held that the Electricity Board was in breach of its duty of care to pedestrians. It had failed to ensure that the excavation was safe for all pedestrians, not just sighted persons. It was clearly not reasonably safe for blind persons, yet it was foreseeable that they might use the pavement.

The degree of risk has to be balanced against the social utility and importance of the defendant\'s activity. For example, in Watt v Hertfordshire CC (1954), the injury sustained by the plaintiff, a fireman, whilst getting to an emergency situation, was not accepted as being the result of a breach of duty of care as, in the circumstances, time was not available to take the measures which would have removed the risk.

(ii)Cost and practicability

Any foreseeable risk has to be balanced against the measures necessary to eliminate it. If the cost of these measures far outweighs the risk, the defendant will probably not be in breach of duty for failing to carry out those measures (Latimer v AEC Ltd (1952)).

(iii)Skilled persons

Individuals who hold themselves out as having particular skills are not judged against the standard of the reasonable person, but the reasonable person possessing the same professional skill as they purport to have (Roe v Minister of Health (1954)).

(b)The position in negligence is that the person ultimately liable in damages is only responsible to the extent that the loss sustained was considered not to be too remote. The test for remoteness was established in The Wagon Mound(No 1) (1961).

The defendants negligently allowed furnace oil to spill from a ship into Sydney harbour, which subsequently caused a fire, which spread to, and damaged, the plaintiff\'s wharf. Although the defendants were held to be in breach of their duty of care, they were only liable for the damage caused to the wharf and slipway through the fouling of the oil. They were not liable for the damage caused by fire because damage by fire was at that time unforeseeable (the oil had a high ignition point and it could not be foreseen that it would ignite on water).

以上是本次51题库考试学习网分享给大家的ACCA考试试题，备考的小伙伴抓紧时间练习一下吧。欲了解更多关于ACCA考试的试题，敬请关注51题库考试学习网！

下面小编为大家准备了 ACCA考试 的相关考题，供大家学习参考。

(ii) Briefly discuss THREE disadvantages of using EVA? in the measurement of financial performance.

(3 marks)

正确答案：
(ii) Disadvantages of an EVA approach to the measurement of financial performance include:
(i) The calculation of EVA may be complicated due to the number of adjustments required.
(ii) It is difficult to use EVA for inter-firm and inter-divisional comparisons because it is not a ratio measure.
(iii) Economic depreciation is difficult to estimate and conflicts with generally accepted accounting principles.
Note: Other relevant discussion would be acceptable.

(b) The Superior Fitness Co (SFC), which is well established in Mayland, operates nine centres. Each of SFC’s

centres is similar in size to those of HFG. SFC also provides dietary plans and fitness programmes to its clients.

The directors of HFG have decided that they wish to benchmark the performance of HFG with that of SFC.

Required:

Discuss the problems that the directors of HFG might experience in their wish to benchmark the performance

of HFG with the performance of SFC, and recommend how such problems might be successfully addressed.

(7 marks)

正确答案：
(b) There are a number of potential problems which the directors of HFG need to recognise. These are as follows:
(i) There needs to exist a sufficient incentive for SFO to share their information with HFG as the success of any
benchmarking programme is dependent upon obtaining accurate information about the comparator organisation. This is
not an easy task to accomplish, as many organisations are reluctant to reveal confidential information to competitors.
The directors of HFG must be able to convince the directors of SFO that entering into a benchmarking arrangement is a
potential ‘win-win situation’.
(ii) The value of the exercise must be sufficient to justify the cost involved. Also, it is inevitable that behavioural issues will
need to be addressed in any benchmarking programme. Management should give priority to the need to communicate
the reasons for undertaking a programme of benchmarking in order to gain the full co-operation of its personnel whilst
reducing the potential level of resistance to change.
(iii) Management need to handle the ethical implications relating to the introduction of benchmarking in a sensitive manner
and should endeavour, insofar as possible, to provide reassurance to employees that their status, remuneration and
working conditions will not suffer as a consequence of the introduction of any benchmarking initiatives.

(b) Router has a number of film studios and office buildings. The office buildings are in prestigious areas whereas

the film studios are located in ‘out of town’ locations. The management of Router wish to apply the ‘revaluation

model’ to the office buildings and the ‘cost model’ to the film studios in the year ended 31 May 2007. At present

both types of buildings are valued using the ‘revaluation model’. One of the film studios has been converted to a

theme park. In this case only, the land and buildings on the park are leased on a single lease from a third party.

The lease term was 30 years in 1990. The lease of the land and buildings was classified as a finance lease even

though the financial statements purport to comply with IAS 17 ‘Leases’.

The terms of the lease were changed on 31 May 2007. Router is now going to terminate the lease early in 2015

in exchange for a payment of $10 million on 31 May 2007 and a reduction in the monthly lease payments.

Router intends to move from the site in 2015. The revised lease terms have not resulted in a change of

classification of the lease in the financial statements of Router. (10 marks)

Required:

Discuss how the above items should be dealt with in the group financial statements of Router for the year ended

31 May 2007.

正确答案：
(b) IAS16 ‘Property, Plant and Equipment’ permits assets to be revalued on a class by class basis. The different characteristics
of the buildings allow them to be classified separately. Different measurement models can, therefore, be used for the office
buildings and the film studios. However, IAS8 ‘Accounting policies, changes in accounting estimates and errors’ says that
once an entity has decided on its accounting policies, it should apply them consistently from period to period and across all
relevant transactions. An entity can change its accounting policies but only in specific circumstances. These circumstances
are:
(a) where there is a new accounting standard or interpretation or changes to an accounting standard
(b) where the change results in the financial statements providing reliable and more relevant information about the effects
of transactions, other events or conditions on the entity’s financial position, financial performance, or cash flows
Voluntary changes in accounting policies are quite uncommon but may occur when an accounting policy is no longer
appropriate. Router will have to ensure that the change in accounting policy meets the criteria in IAS8. Additionally,
depreciated historical cost will have to be calculated for the film studios at the commencement of the period and the opening
balance on the revaluation reserve and any other affected component of equity adjusted. The comparative amounts for each
prior period should be presented as if the new accounting policy had always been applied. There are limits on retrospective
application on the grounds of impracticability.
It is surprising that the lease of the land is considered to be a finance lease under IAS17 ‘Leases’. Land is considered to have
an indefinite life and should, therefore normally be classified as an operating lease unless ownership passes to the lessee
during the lease term. The lease of the land should be separated out from the lease and treated individually. The value of the
land so determined would be taken off the balance sheet in terms of the liability and asset and the lease payments treated
as rentals in the income statement. A prior period adjustment should also be made. The buildings would continue to be
treated as property, plant and equipment (PPE) and the carrying amount not adjusted. However, the remaining useful life of
the building should be revised to reflect the shorter lease term. This will result in the carrying amount being depreciated over
the shorter period. This change to the depreciation policy is applied prospectively not retrospectively.
The lease liability must be assessed for derecognition under IAS39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’,
because of the revision of the lease terms, in order to determine whether the new terms are substantially different from the
old. The purpose of this is to determine whether the change in terms is a modification or an extinguishment. The change
seems to constitute a ‘modification’ because there is little change to the terms. The lease liability is, therefore, amended by
deducting the one off payment ($10 million) from the carrying amount (after adjustment for the lease of land) together with
any transaction costs. The lease liability is then remeasured to the present value of the revised future cash flows, discounted
using the original effective interest rate. Any adjustment made in remeasuring the lease liability will be taken to the income
statement.

声明：本文内容由互联网用户自发贡献自行上传，本网站不拥有所有权，未作人工编辑处理，也不承担相关法律责任。如果您发现有涉嫌版权的内容，欢迎发送邮件至：contact@51tk.com 进行举报，并提供相关证据，工作人员会在5个工作日内联系你，一经查实，本站将立刻删除涉嫌侵权内容。

站内搜索
热门标签