Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00107:front:0:p73
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00107
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 241683–244933

report the sustainability information, which may result in practitioners being less willing to question management's approach.

           * Complexity of the engagement. The larger, more complex and more diverse the entity (e.g., the greater its geographical spread, and the more dependent it is on a long and diverse supply chain), the more challenging it may be to understand and evaluate:

                   + Whether the sustainability matters are appropriate in the engagement circumstances; and

                   + How much prominence should be given to each disclosure in the context of the sustainability information as a whole.

 1.          Possible actions that the engagement team may take to mitigate impediments to the exercise of professional scepticism at the engagement level may include:

           * Remaining alert to changes in the nature or circumstances of the engagement that necessitate requesting additional or different resources for the engagement.

           * Explicitly alerting the engagement team to instances or situations when vulnerability to unconscious or conscious biases may be greater (e.g., areas involving greater judgement).

           * Changing the composition of the engagement team, for example, requesting that more experienced individuals with greater skills or knowledge or specific expertise are assigned to the engagement.

           * Involving more experienced members of the engagement team in more complex areas of the engagement or when dealing with members of management who are difficult or challenging to interact with.

           * Involving members of the engagement team with specialised skills and knowledge or a practitioner's expert to assist the engagement team with complex or subjective areas of the engagement.

           * Involving appropriate resources to perform procedures to obtain evidence about sustainability information related to group components and value chain components.

           * Modifying the nature, timing and extent of direction, supervision or review, for example, by more in-person oversight on a more frequent basis or more in-depth reviews of certain working papers.

           * Communicating with those charged with governance when management imposes undue pressure or the engagement team experiences difficulties in obtaining access to records, facilities, certain employees, customers, vendors or others from whom evidence may be sought.

Professional Judgement (Ref: Para. 40)

 1.          Professional judgement is essential to the proper conduct of an assurance engagement. This is because interpretation of relevant ethical requirements and the ASSAs, and the informed decisions required throughout the engagement, cannot be made without the application of relevant training, knowledge, and experience to the facts and circumstances. Professional judgement is necessary in particular regarding decisions about:

           * The presence of the preconditions for an assurance engagement.

           * Materiality and engagement risk.

           * The nature, timing and extent of procedures used to meet the requirements of this ASSA and any other relevant ASSAs and to obtain evidence, including where, and to what extent, it is