1.   Before the reports referred to in Articles 10 and 11 are issued, an engagement quality control review (in this Article hereinafter referred to as: review) shall be performed to assess whether the statutory auditor or the key audit partner could reasonably have come to the opinion and conclusions expressed in the draft of these reports.

2.   The review shall be performed by an engagement quality control reviewer (in this Article hereinafter referred to as: reviewer). The reviewer shall be a statutory auditor who is not involved in the performance of the statutory audit to which the review relates.

3.   By way of derogation from paragraph 2, where the statutory audit is carried out by an audit firm and all the statutory auditors were involved in the carrying-out of the statutory audit, or where the statutory audit is carried out by a statutory auditor and the statutory auditor is not a partner or employee of an audit firm, he, she or it shall arrange for another statutory auditor to perform a review. The disclosure of documents or information to the independent reviewer for the purposes of this Article shall not constitute a breach of professional secrecy. Documents or information disclosed to the reviewer for the purposes of this Article shall be subject to professional secrecy.

4.   When performing the review, the reviewer shall record at least the following:

(a)	the oral and written information provided by the statutory auditor or the key audit partner to support the significant judgements as well as the main findings of the audit procedures carried out and the conclusions drawn from those findings, whether or not at the request of the reviewer;

(b)	the opinions of the statutory auditor or the key audit partner, as expressed in the draft of the reports referred to in Articles 10 and 11;

5.   The review shall at least assess the following elements:

(a)	the independence of the statutory auditor or the audit firm from the audited entity;

(b)	the significant risks which are relevant to the statutory audit and which the statutory auditor or the key audit partner has identified during the performance of the statutory audit and the measures that he or she has taken to adequately manage those risks;

(c)	the reasoning of the statutory auditor or the key audit partner, in particular with regard to the level of materiality and the significant risks referred to in point (b);

(d)	any request for advice to external experts and the implementation of such advice;

(e)	the nature and scope of the corrected and uncorrected misstatements in the financial statements that were identified during the carrying out of the audit;

(f)	the subjects discussed with the audit committee and the management and/or supervisory bodies of the audited entity;

(g)	the subjects discussed with competent authorities and, where applicable, with other third parties;

(h)	whether the documents and information selected from the file by the reviewer support the opinion of the statutory auditor or the key audit partner as expressed in the draft of the reports referred to in Articles 10 and 11.

6.   The reviewer shall discuss the results of the review with the statutory auditor or the key audit partner. The audit firm shall establish procedures for determining the manner in which any disagreement between the key audit partner and the reviewer are to be resolved.

7.   The statutory auditor or the audit firm and the reviewer shall keep a record of the results of the review, together with the considerations underlying those results.