Accounting for Managers: Case Study on Professional Misconduct

This report examines a case involving Gray John Davies and the disciplinary actions taken by The Disciplinary Tribunal of Australia and New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants. The report details the investigation, the tribunal hearing, and the reasons for the decision to suspend Davies for misappropriating client funds, professional misconduct, and failure to adhere to the institute's code of conduct. The report highlights Davies's actions, including allowing payments to third parties without client authorization, failing to repay funds, and neglecting professional duties. Furthermore, the report discusses the importance of professional bodies publishing their decisions to maintain transparency, accountability, and public trust. The publication serves as a warning to members and ensures that justice prevails, thereby reinforcing the public's confidence in the profession. The report concludes by emphasizing the commitment of professional bodies to ethical standards and governance.

ACCOUNTING FOR MANAGERS
ACCOUNTING FOR MANAGERS
By Student`s Name
Code+Course Name
Professor`s Name
University Name
City,State
Date
1

ACCOUNTING FOR MANAGERS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover page………………………………………………………………………1
Table of contents………………………………………………………………...2
Investigation and tribunal hearing………………………………………………3
Reason for publishing decision…………………………………………………3, 4
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..5
References…………………………………………………………………………6
2

ACCOUNTING FOR MANAGERS
INVESTIGATION AND TRIBUNAL HEARING OF GRAY JOHN DAVIES CASE
The recent disciplinary action to be undertaken by The Disciplinary Tribunal of Australia and
New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants was that which involved Gray John Davies.
This was after the Professional Conduct Committee filed an application that aimed at
suspending Gray on account of misappropriating client`s funds. As per the investigation, the
tribunal heard that the accused party committed misconducts contrary to the "New Zealand
Institute of Chartered Accountants Act 1996":among the particulars of which the Accused of
guilty of are;1.He misbehaved in a professional capacity,2.That his conducts were
unbecoming for accountant.3.That his negligence in a professional capacity tended to bring
disrepute to the accounting professional body.4.Upon being called upon to respond to some
of the allegations levelled against him by the institute, he failed to respond promptly and
lastly that he breached the rules and the institute's code of conducts.
In particulars between 2012 and 2015 Gray allowed payments amounting to $3,500 that
belonged to his client to be made to a third party without Alerting his client concerning each
payment, obtaining authority from his client to make payments, documenting any permission
granted by the customer and therefore all these amounted to the contravention of the
Fundamental Principles of Integrity and Quality Performance. Furthermore, it was submitted
that Gray had not repaid the amount owed by the third party to his client despite Gray`s
promise to the effect that and thus he was in breach of the Professional Behavior of the Code
of Ethics (2014).It was also held that Gray failed to take due care and diligence to give
accountancy services to his client such as failing to prepare the annual financial statement for
his client in a time and failure to file the 2015 tax return.
3

ACCOUNTING FOR MANAGERS
Gray also neglected to respond in time to the communication from the Professional Conduct
Committee and as such he was in breach of Rules 13.2 paragraph 130.4 of the Codes of
Ethics(2014).
Lastly, he failed to attend the final ruling hearing when he was required to do so and thus he
was in breach of Rule 13.3(d).Thus in the view of the above allegations levelled against Gray
and the subsequent confirmation that they were indeed true, the Institute of Chartered
Accountants found it sufficient grounds to suspend Gray John Davie to protect the reputation
of the accountancy profession.
REASON WHY PROFESSIONAL BODIES PUBLISH THEIR DECISIONS
It has become essential for professional organisations to make their decision public and
release them.This is because professional bodies are at the core of any society in ensuring the
creation of a society founded on trust and good values. The confidence that member of the
public attribute to the professional bodies is immense because it serves as a watchdog and
body which the clients turn to in the event its members treats the customers unfairly during
execution of their duties (Ikosa, M.M., 2013 ). Due to improved trust, this leads to the
reduction in uncertainties and transaction cost. There whenever the members that belong to
these professional bodies act in a manner that is not fair to their clients, it is incumbent upon
the concerned professional body to take the important measures of interrogating the
unbecoming behaviors perpetrated by its members to shield the body from the public and
their client disreputation.It is imperative that once a member is caught to have been involved
in certain malpractices, the proceedings on how this case is tackled should be kept public and
the final action was taken against the culprit be published on the platforms’ that is readily
available to the public. By so doing the victims of such malpractices will appreciate that
indeed justice has prevailed and this will ensure the continuity of confidence that such a
4

ACCOUNTING FOR MANAGERS
professional body should command. The publication of the decision by the professional
bodies also aims at sending a warning to its member of the public disrepute that awaits them
in case the act in a manner that is dishonest. By so doing it gives the members some sense of
responsibility as their reputation is on the line when undertaking their responsibility. It should
be incumbent upon the professional bodies to regulate and promote their respective
proffesion.For instance, “The General Osteopathic Council (GOsC) “has a mandatory
responsibility to protect the public by developing and promoting the osteopathic profession
(Council, G.S.C., 2010).
CONCLUSION
Thus the need for professional bodies to publish their decision is based on their commitment
to maintaining the transparency and accountability and to provide the qualification that is
trusted and that remain open to individuals. These help these professional bodies to act as
pacesetter and trailblazer in matters of governance and ethical issues hence setting standards
and prosecuting those who contravene those said standard.
REFERENCE
Simonet, D., 2016. Reforming the French health-care system: the quest for accountability.
International Review of Administrative Sciences, p.0020852316648226.
Forrer, J., Kee, J.E., Newcomer, K.E. and Boyer, E., 2010. Public–private partnerships and
the public accountability question. Public Administration Review, 70(3), pp.475-484.
Council, G.S.C., 2010. Code of practice. General Osteopathic Council,[Online]. Available at:
http://www. Osteopathy. org. UK/uploads/code_of_practice. pdf. Accessed, 7.
Bovens, M.A., 2008. Analysing and Assessing Public Accountability. A Conceptual
Framework. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV).
5

ACCOUNTING FOR MANAGERS
Dubnick, M., 2009. Accountability and the promise of performance: In search of the
mechanisms. Public Performance & Management Review, 28(3), pp.376-417
Ikosa, M.M., 2013. The selected perceptions of public relations practitioners about the
Public Relations Institute of Southern Africa (PRISA) Namibia (Doctoral dissertation).
6