Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00107:front:0:p85
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00107
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 277044–280396

conclusion or opinion.

 1.       If the practitioner determines that another practitioner's communications are not adequate for the practitioner's purposes, the practitioner may consider whether, for example:

           * Further information can be obtained from another practitioner (e.g., through further discussions or meetings);

           * Review of additional documentation of another practitioner may provide the practitioner with further information; or

           * There are any concerns about another practitioner's competence or capabilities.

Reviewing additional documentation of work performed by another practitioner (Ref: Para. 54)

 1.       Determining whether to review additional documentation of another practitioner may include consideration of:

           * The nature, timing and extent of the work performed by another practitioner;

           * The competence and capabilities of another practitioner; and

           * The significant judgements made by, and the findings or conclusions of, another practitioner about matters that are material to the sustainability information.

Evidence obtained from work of another practitioner inadequate for practitioner's purposes (Ref: Para. 55)

 1.       A scope limitation exists when the practitioner is unable to:

           * Obtain evidence from the work of another practitioner that is adequate for the practitioner's purposes; and

           * Obtain, through alternative means, sufficient appropriate evidence over the disclosures for which the practitioner intended to use the work of another practitioner as evidence.

In such circumstances, the practitioner considers the implications for the engagement and the assurance report in accordance with paragraph 185.

Using the Work of a Practitioner's Expert (Ref: Para. 56–57)

 1.       The practitioner has sole responsibility for the assurance conclusion expressed, and that responsibility is not reduced by the practitioner's use of the work of a practitioner's expert. Nonetheless, if the practitioner using the work of a practitioner's expert, having followed this ASSA, concludes that the work of that expert is adequate for the practitioner's purposes, the practitioner may accept that expert's findings or conclusions in the expert's field as appropriate evidence.

 2.       The nature, timing and extent of procedures to fulfill the requirement in paragraphs 56–57 will vary depending on the circumstances. Relevant considerations may include:

           * The significance of the practitioner's expert's work in the context of the engagement (see also paragraph A140).

           * The nature of the disclosure(s) to which that expert's work relates.

           * The assessed risks of material misstatement of the sustainability information to which that expert's work relates.

           * The practitioner's knowledge of and experience with previous work performed by that expert.

 1.       Agreement on the respective roles and responsibilities of the practitioner and the practitioner's expert may also include agreement about access to, and retention of, each other's engagement documentation. A practitioner's internal expert is a member of the engagement team and therefore that expert's working papers form part of the engagement documentation.

 2.       Effective two-way communication