The following drafting principles and conventions have been adopted to implement the objectives discussed above:
mandatory requirements and explanatory guidance are shown in separate paragraphs;
paragraphs containing mandatory requirements are shown in bold-type text;
the word ‘shall’ is used within mandatory requirements paragraphs to denote the obligations an auditor is required to comply with in the conduct of an audit or review;
the present tense of verbs is used in the explanatory guidance when it is the best form of expression. Use of the present tense does not create or imply mandatory requirements. The present tense is used in examples and other explanatory guidance that relate to professional judgement and professional scepticism; and
practical examples are used in explanatory guidance. Practical examples do not constitute basic principles or essential procedures (mandatory requirements).
The drafting utilised in AUASB Standards reflects the AUASB’s intention that:
the auditor is required to exercise professional judgement, as described in paragraph 36, according to the given circumstances; and
explanatory guidance does not extend:
mandatory requirements; or
the auditor’s obligations under AUASB Standards.
AUASB Standards, as mentioned above, are based commonly on their ISA-equivalent standard. For each AUASB Standard, obligations implied within the explanatory guidance of the equivalent ISA have been:
when appropriate, elevated to a mandatory requirement (bold-type); or
linked to a mandatory requirement(s), thereby demonstrating the AUASB’s intention that the explanatory guidance is interpreted in the context of the relevant mandatory requirement; or
prefaced by inserting the word ‘ordinarily’ as a qualifier (see below).
Words and Phrases
The following words and phrases are used in AUASB Standards for the respective stated purposes (alphabetically):
explanatory guidance means suggested or typical audit procedures, practical examples and other explanatory details and procedures that are included for the purposes of understanding, and complying with, mandatory requirements. Explanatory guidance does not create or extend mandatory requirements or the auditor’s obligations under AUASB Standards.
‘in accordance with…the auditor is required to…’ means explanatory guidance that is directly linked to a mandatory requirement, either in the same AUASB Standard or in another AUASB Standard. The phrase is used only where the wording in the explanatory guidance is identical to that in the mandatory requirement.
including means a list of items or examples is provided but the list does not purport to contain all relevant items or examples and intentionally is not exhaustive.
mandatory requirements means relevant basic principles and essential procedures that must be applied in order for the audit or review engagement to comply with AUASB Standards.
ordinarily means the explanatory guidance indicates practical methods or means by which mandatory requirements may be complied with and is to be read in the following context:
where the word ‘ordinarily’ is used, the auditor exercises professional judgement in considering:
whether the noted circumstances apply to the current audit, review or other assurance engagement; and
if so, whether the suggested procedures are appropriate to perform; or
where there are alternative procedures which are more appropriate, whether these alternative procedures are to be performed.
the word ‘ordinarily’ does not create a rebuttable presumption nor a mandatory requirement.
shall means an imperative obligation on auditors when appearing in bold-type mandatory requirements. In certain circumstances, imperative obligations are legally binding and enforceable.
‘Under…the auditor needs to…’ means words contained within the explanatory guidance that highlight a linkage between mandatory requirements (bold-type) and the relevant explanatory guidance that:
in part, or in whole, restates the meaning of the mandatory requirement; and
may describe audit or review procedures, more detailed than those contained in the relevant mandatory requirement. However, these described audit or review procedures do not create or extend mandatory requirements.
Furthermore, an auditor may judge it necessary, in order to comply with the relevant mandatory requirement, to:
perform alternative audit or review procedures in place of some or all of those described in the explanatory guidance; or
perform some, but not all, of the audit or review procedures described in the explanatory guidance.
The purpose of the linkage between the mandatory requirements and the relevant explanatory guidance is to:
direct the auditor to the relevant mandatory requirement(s); and
emphasise that interpretation of the explanatory guidance is to be made in the context of that mandatory requirement.