Oil Trading Company, Dram Oil and Trading Limited has refuted Deloitte & Touche's assertions that it carried out its duties in accordance with accepted accounting principles. This is Dram Oil's response to the audit firm's filings.
The Audit business has filed new documents revising its defence through its attorneys, lead by Ace Ankomah.
Dram Oil is suing the auditing company for more than 187,595,000 in damages. The oil business claims that Deloitte's negligence qualifies it for such compensation. According to court documents obtained by JoyNews, the business dispute between Dram Oil and Cal Bank that gave birth to the case happened sometime in 2013.
Dram Oil won the case in court and was given a favourable ruling. In addition, the court issued consequential orders calling for the hiring of an audit company to "audit the books, records, and inventory of the 7th Defendant relating to the subject-matter suit, particularly with respect to payments, receivables, and emergency cargo under recoveries received by 7th Defendant under the Tripartite Agreement."
According to reports, Deloitte and Touche was given the assignment to carry out this audit in May 2018 after the first auditing company failed to do so.
Deloitte & Touche claim to have had access to court-related documents that are thought to have established the crucial facts pertaining to the dispute.
However, Dram Oil claims that the audit firm's findings demonstrated that it had relied on "irrelevant, deceptive, and egregiously flawed fictions."
But Deloitte maintained in documents it submitted that its selection as an auditing company was not based on any facts found to be true in a court decision.
Deloitte has recently changed its defence, adding that the High Court's terms of reference (TOR) did not originate from and did not contain the facts and conclusions that were made by the court.
It further claims that it performed its duties diligently and in accordance with accepted accounting principles. Due to these reasons, Dram Oil has amended papers via the help of its attorney, Gaspar Lyle Nii-Aponsah.
The methodology and manner in which Deloitte performed the audit and came at its conclusions are said to have shown a "wanton, purposeful, thoughtless, and irresponsible disposition, therefore showing Deloitte's gross negligence."