We permit the publication of our auditors’ report, provided the report is published in full only and is accompanied by the full financial statements to which our auditors’ report relates, and is only published on an access-controlled page on your website, to enable users to verify that an auditors’ report by independent accountants has been commissioned by the directors and issued. Such permission to publish is given by us without accepting or assuming any responsibility or liability to any third party users save where we have agreed terms with them in writing.

Our consent is given on condition that before any third party accesses our auditors’ report via the webpage they first document their agreement to the following terms of access to our report via a click-through webpage with an 'I accept' button. The terms to be included on your website are as follows:

I accept and agree for and on behalf of myself and the Trust I represent (each a "recipient") that:

  1. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) accepts no liability (including liability for negligence) to each recipient in relation to PwC’s report. The report is provided to each recipient for information purposes only. If a recipient relies on PwC’s report, it does so entirely at its own risk;
  2. No recipient will bring a claim against PwC which relates to the access to the report by a recipient;
  3. Neither PwC’s report, nor information obtained from it, may be made available to anyone else without PwC’s prior written consent, except where required by law or regulation; and
  4. PwC’s report was prepared with Hermes Property Unit Trust's interests in mind. It was not prepared with any recipient's interests in mind or for its use. PwC’s report is not a substitute for any enquiries that a recipient should make. The financial statements are as at 25 March 2017, and thus PwC’s auditors’ report is based on historical information. Any projection of such information or PwC’s opinion thereon to future periods is subject to the risk that changes may occur after the reports are issued and the description of controls may no longer accurately portray the system of internal control. For these reasons, such projection of information to future periods would be inappropriate.
  5. PwC will be entitled to the benefit of and to enforce these terms.
I accept

1. Select your country

  • United Kingdom
  • Austria
  • Australia
  • Belgium
  • Denmark
  • Finland
  • France
  • Germany
  • Iceland
  • Ireland
  • Italy
  • Luxembourg
  • Netherlands
  • Norway
  • Singapore
  • Spain
  • Sweden
  • Switzerland
  • USA
  • Other

2. Select your investor type

  • Financial Advisor
  • Discretionary Investment Manager
  • Wealth Manager
  • Family Office
  • Institutional Investor
  • Investment Consultant
  • Charity, Foundation & Endowment Investor
  • Retail Investor
  • Press
  • None of the above

3. Accept our terms and conditions

By clicking Proceed I confirm I have read the important information and agree to the terms of use.


The Hermes Investment Management website uses cookies to remember your preferences and help us improve the site.
By proceeding, you agree to cookies being placed on your computer.
Read our privacy and cookie notices.


Protecting human rights

Home / EOS Case Studies / Microsoft

Tim Goodman
21 November 2016

One of the largest companies in the world, Microsoft is a global leader in software, services, devices and solutions that aim to help, in the words of its mission statement, to “empower every person and every organisation on the planet to achieve more”. With such a bold purpose, we are pleased that the company seems to take its human rights obligations seriously.

Microsoft faces a host of complex issues. These include protecting the rights of its customers and users of its products to privacy and to freedom of expression, at the same time as protecting the public and, in particular, the most vulnerable from crime, such as terrorism, child abuse and human trafficking. Other challenges are to minimise the negative human rights consequences in its hardware supply chain and dealing with the implications for human rights of new technology, such as machine learning.

What we did
While we have been in dialogue on human rights with the company for a number of years, our engagement has been particularly intensive during 2016. In the first half of 2016, we had a discussion about the company’s and technology industry’s legal battle concerning the right of privacy and pushing back on unlawful requests from government and law enforcement agencies for data to fight crime, including terrorism. We also co-signed an investor letter to Microsoft and held an initial discussion concerning child labour in the company’s cobalt supply chain in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). In addition, we participated in a human rights workshop in New York sponsored by the Robert F Kennedy Center for Justice & Human Rights and worked with the company and its peers in developing key performance indicators for human rights in the technology sector. Furthermore, we met the company’s head of responsibility and data ethicist at its headquarters to continue our dialogue. As one of only two investor voices, we participated in a stakeholder workshop in the third quarter of the year, convened by the company to provide input into its 2020 human rights roadmap. After receiving the company’s response to the letter, we also took part in a joint investor call on cobalt in the DRC.

What we found
The depth and breadth of our interactions with the company on human rights in 2016 continue to demonstrate Microsoft’s concern for human rights. We are delighted that it has found time to discuss with us in detail the complexities of the issues it faces and how it works hard to minimise the adverse human rights effects of its activities and products and, importantly, to protect and improve the human rights outcomes of those who are affected by the company in any way. We are pleased that Microsoft, who we believe is a leader in human rights, has spent so much time seeking our views and explaining its efforts. In turn, we are encouraging other companies to demonstrate a similar openness and willingness to address human rights.


Share this post:
Tim Goodman Tim Goodman is a director at Hermes EOS and sector lead for oil and gas. He is also responsible for Hermes EOS’ activities in North America. Previously, he worked in the insurance industry and held a number of senior operational management roles before acting as a company secretary at a UK-listed company. He is a member of the Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators, having obtained the institute prize for the best overall performance when he qualified. Tim is a regular speaker on governance-related matters, a former member of the US Council of Institutional Investors’ corporate governance advisory council and a former chair of the UK Quoted Companies Alliance corporate governance committee. He is currently on the ESG advisory board of US law firm Grant & Eisenhofer.
Read all articles by Tim Goodman
Previous article:
Next article:

Engagement objectives

Social: Conflict minerals management

Social: Data management policy and practice

Find posts by author

  • Alex Knox, ACA
  • Andrew Jackson
  • Bill Mackenzie
  • Bruce Duguid
  • Christine Chow
  • Claire Gavini
  • Colin Melvin
  • Darren Brady
  • Dominic Burke
  • Dr Michael Viehs
  • Emeric Chenebaux
  • Emma Hunt
  • Geoffrey Wan, CFA
  • Hans-Christoph Hirt
  • Harriet Steel
  • Ilana Elbim
  • Jaime Gornsztejn
  • Jonathan Pines, CFA
  • Joseph Buckley
  • Justine Lutterodt
  • Leon Kamhi
  • Louise Dudley
  • Mark Sherlock, CFA
  • Maxine Wille
  • Michael Russell, CFA
  • Michael Vaughan
  • Michael Viehs
  • Natacha Dimitrijevic
  • Nick Spooner
  • Nina Röhrbein
  • Peter Hofbauer
  • Philip Nell
  • Rochelle Giugni
  • Roland Bosch
  • Sachi Suzuki
  • Saker Nusseibeh
  • Silvia Dall’Angelo
  • Tatiana Bosteels
  • Tim Goodman
  • Tommaso Mancuso
  • Yasmin Chowdhury

Find posts by category

  • eos
  • social