01 02 03 Financial Statements 04 Opinions on other matters prescribed by the Companies Act 2006 In our opinion, the part of the directors’ remuneration report to be audited has been properly prepared in accordance with the Companies Act 2006. In our opinion, based on the work undertaken in the course of the audit: • the information given in the strategic report and the directors’ report for the financial year for which the financial statements are prepared is consistent with the financial statements; and • the strategic report and the directors’ report have been prepared in accordance with applicable legal requirements. Matters on which we are required to report by exception In the light of the knowledge and understanding of the group and the parent company and its environment obtained in the course of the audit, we have not identified material misstatements in the strategic report or the directors’ report. We have nothing to report in respect of the following matters in relation to which the Companies Act 2006 requires us to report to you if, in our opinion: • adequate accounting records have not been kept by the parent company, or returns adequate for our audit have not been received from branches not visited by us; or • the parent company financial statements and the part of the Directors’ Remuneration Report to be audited are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or • certain disclosures of directors’ remuneration specified by law are not made; or • we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit. Responsibilities of directors As explained more fully in the directors’ responsibilities statement set out on page 108, the directors are responsible for the preparation of the financial statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view, and for such internal control as the directors determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. In preparing the financial statements, the directors are responsible for assessing the group and parent company’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless the directors either intend to liquidate the group or the parent company or to cease operations, or have no realistic alternative but to do so. Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs (UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements. Explanation as to what extent the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud The objectives of our audit, in respect to fraud, are; to identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements due to fraud; to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence regarding the assessed risks of material misstatement due to fraud, through designing and implementing appropriate responses; and to respond appropriately to fraud or suspected fraud identified during the audit. However, the primary responsibility for the prevention and detection of fraud rests with both those charged with governance of the entity and management. Our approach was as follows: • We obtained an understanding of the legal and regulatory frameworks that are applicable to the group and determined that the most significant are those that relate to the reporting framework (IFRS, Companies Act 2006, the UK Corporate Governance Code and the Listing Rules of the UK Listing Authority requirements) and those laws and regulations relating to the provision of healthcare and pharmaceutical services in Georgia. • We understood how the group is complying with those frameworks by making enquiries of management, internal audit, those responsible for legal and compliance procedures and the Company Secretary. We corroborated our enquiries through our review of board minutes, papers provided to the Audit committee and correspondence received from regulatory bodies. • We assessed the susceptibility of the group’s financial statements to material misstatement, including how fraud might occur by considering the controls that the Group has established to address risks identified by the entity or that otherwise seek to prevent, deter or detect fraud. We also considered performance and incentive plans targets and their potential to influence management to manage earnings or influence the perceptions of investors. • Based on this understanding we designed our audit procedures to identify non-compliance with such laws and regulations identified in above. Our procedures involved: journal entry testing, with a focus on journals indicating large or unusual transactions based on our understanding of the business; enquiries of legal counsel, group management, internal audit, management of business segments; and focused testing as referred to in the Key Audit Matters section above. • If any instance of non-compliance with laws and regulations were identified, these were communicated to the relevant local EY teams who performed sufficient and appropriate audit procedures supplemented by audit procedures performed at the group level. 119