What is considered to be "crucial" in determining liability for the negligent preparation of financial statements?

69. For example, in Haig v. Bamford accountants were held liable for the negligent preparation of financial statements on which they knew a very few investors might rely in respect of the one transaction for which the statements were prepared. What was said to be "crucial" was that the auditors knew the nature of the transaction to which the statements would be put. Indeed, Dickson J. (later C.J.C.) made that point no less than five times in the course of his judgment (pp. 470,478-79, 482, 483, and 484). In particular he said at pp. 478-79: In the present case the accountants knew that the financial statements were being prepared for the very purpose of influencing ... a limited number of potential investors. ... What was important was the nature of the transaction or transactions for which the statements were intended, for that is what delineated the limits of potential liability.