Thèse (LL.M.)--Université Laval, 1996. / Bibliogr.: f. i-xix. Publié aussi en version électronique.

No description available.

This study examines the "off-the-job" behavior of individuals in office-level leadership positions across the Big 4 audit firms in the U.S. In their leadership role, the managing partner is responsible for setting the tone at the top of an office through formal communication of firm-wide policies and an informal example through their behavior and preferences. Given this role, I predict that engagements conducted within offices led by individuals who are willing to break the rules will exhibit characteristics synonymous with increased audit risks. Relying on their history of legal infractions to identify rule-breaking behavior, I find managing partners with prior infractions are associated with engagements that reflect increased misstatement risk and detection risk (i.e., lower auditor effort). Additional tests reveal that the results are concentrated in offices that are located further away from alternative governance mechanisms within the same audit firm. Importantly, after controlling for the risk of misstatement, I find the pricing of misstatement risk declines significantly on engagements in offices with infraction managing partners. The results are robust to alternative measures of managing partners' prior infractions and the use of entropy balancing techniques, along with several other robustness tests. Collectively, my study contributes to our limited knowledge of the quality control structures in place at large audit firms and provides a potential mechanism for tone at the Big 4 audit firms to vary across offices. / Doctor of Philosophy / In their leadership role, office managing partners are the "top executive" appointed to lead the Big 4 audit offices across the U.S. While audit firms have reputation and litigation incentives to provide high quality audits, these incentives do not necessarily apply to individual auditors. Therefore, audit firms are required to formalize a system of quality controls—including leadership and tone at the top—to ensure promote professional skepticism, stress quality service, and reduce overall audit risk on engagements. Relatedly, during inspections, the PCAOB examines whether the actions and communications by managing partners in local leadership positions demonstrate a commitment to audit quality and compliance with applicable regulations and professional standards. Grounded in revealed preference theory, I rely on a managing partner's history of legal infractions to identify offices led by partners with impulsive, risk-taking, and present-oriented personalities. Criminology and psychology research empirically validate the cross-situational consistency of individual behavior and decisions over time and in different settings. In other words, individuals who commit legal infractions—including less severe traffic violations such as parking tickets—exhibit a preference or propensity to break the rules. To the extent that an individual's leadership style is influenced by their personal ethics, values, and attitudes, I expect variation in a managing partner's history of legal infraction to reflect variation in their leadership style and office tone towards audit risk on engagements. Consistent with this prediction, I find managing partners with prior infractions are associated with engagements that reflect increased misstatement risk and detection risk (i.e., lower auditor effort). Additional tests reveal that the results are concentrated in offices that are located further away from alternative governance mechanisms within the same audit firm. Importantly, after controlling for the risk of misstatement, I find the pricing of misstatement risk declines significantly on engagements in offices with infraction managing partners. The results are robust to alternative measures of managing partners' prior infractions and the use of entropy balancing techniques, along with several other robustness tests. Collectively, my study contributes to our limited knowledge of the quality control structures in place at large audit firms and provides a potential mechanism for tone at the Big 4 audit firms to vary across offices.

Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:19:40Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Renata Fiori Puccetti.pdf: 649184 bytes, checksum: b522eb74d7a5b5bc5824a9832320682e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-11-30 / The paper concerns an investigation of the legal regime of infractions and penalties applicable to private agents in the subject-matter of public tenders and administrative contracts, and address questions related that comprise the analysis of the infractions and sanctions in species, existent in the Brazilian legal system, the presuppositions and procedures to the verification and sanctioning, as well as acquaint their aspects and extension. Are types of special relationship of submission, characterized by the bond of differentiated approximation, what entails to acknowledge its differentiated legal regime from ordinary relationship of submission, within the sanctioning administrative law / O objetivo deste trabalho é fazer uma investigação do regime jurídico das infrações e sanções aplicáveis aos particulares, em matéria de licitações e contratos administrativos e abordar questões correlatas que abrangem a análise das infrações e sanções em espécie, previstas no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro, os pressupostos e procedimento para apuração e sancionamento, bem como conhecer-lhes as feições e extensão. São espécies de relação de sujeição especial, caracterizadas pelo vínculo de aproximação diferenciado, o que implica reconhecer-lhe regime jurídico diferenciado das relações de sujeição geral, dentro do Direito Administrativo Sancionador

Reproduction de : Thèse doctorat : Droit : Lyon 3 : 2001. / Titre provenant de l'écran-titre. Notes bibliogr. Bibliogr. p. 515-564. Index.

Texte remanié de : Dissertation : Juristische Fakultät : Frankfurt am Main, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität : 2003. / Table des matières.

Le système probatoire qui régit le fonctionnement des juridictions pénales internationales et des juridictions pénales françaises a pour finalité la recherche de la vérité, l’établissement de la responsabilité pénale individuelle et la sanction appropriée à l’endroit des coupables. Elle a également pour objectif d’innocenter les personnes dont la culpabilité n’a pas été prouvée. Nonobstant cette noble finalité commune, ces juridictions marquent, à travers leurs textes fondamentaux et leur pratique, des points de divergence et de convergence. Les circonstances de la commission des crimes sexuels, les difficultés d’identification du criminel sexuel, d’apporter des preuves fiables et crédibles de culpabilité, le sentiment de culpabilité développée par les victimes, la qualité et la personnalité de l’auteur, l’âge et la vulnérabilité de la victime sont autant de problèmes qui ont orienté la présente étude comparée entre les juridictions pénales françaises et les juridictions pénales internationales. L’admission et l’appréciation des preuves sont des problématiques où la complexité des affaires, l’ambiguïté ainsi que l’imprécision des textes peuvent joindre rapidement la subjectivité des juges qui doivent pourtant inculper ou innocenter dès que les conditions conviennent. L’étude a essayé de comparer, en termes de difficultés et de lacunes, de divergence et de ressemblance, la manière dont ces juridictions procèdent à la répression des crimes sexuels tout en garantissant à toutes les parties un procès équitable. / The probationary system which governs the functioning of the international criminal jurisdictions and the French criminal jurisdictions has for purpose the search for the truth, the determination of individual responsibility and the appropriate penalties towards the guilty of crimes. It has also for purpose to acquit the people whose the guilt has not been proven. Notwithstanding this noble common purpose, these criminal jurisdictions mark, through their fundamental texts and their practice, points of divergence and convergence.The circumstances of the commission of sexual crimes, the difficulties to identify the sexual crimes, to bring a reliable and credible proofs of guilt, the feeling of guilt developed by the victims, the quality and the personality of the author, the age and the vulnerability of the victims are so many matters which directed the present comparative study of French and international criminal jurisdictions.The admission and the appreciation of proofs become issues when the complexity of the affairs, the ambiguity as well as the imprecision of texts can join quickly the subjectivity of the judges who have to charge or acquit a person as soon as the conditions are suitable. The study attempted to compare, in terms of difficulties and gaps, divergence and similarity, the way in which these jurisdictions enforce sexual crimes while ensuring fair trials for all parties.

This dissertation deals with the topic of minor offences against public order. While working on this dissertation there has been a major change in the law, where the act number 200/1990 Sb. about minor offences was replaced by two new acts. Firstly it was replaced with the law number 250/2016 Sb. about responsibility for minor offences and the legal proceedings (furthermore minor offense law) and secondly with the law number 251/2016 Sb., about selected minor offences. This thesis aims at the area of minor offenses against public order regulated in the act about selected minor offences, it describes individual offenses and analyses whether there has been any change compared to previous regulations. This dissertation consists of seven chapters. In the first chapter I deal with the definition of a minor offence. I describe the individual definition of minor offences and describe its particular features. The second chapter follows the first; I deal with the responsibilities for offences caused by legal entities and business individuals. This modification was not previously included in the offense law, and I would like to describe the individual bases of responsibility for these subjects. The third chapter deals with the definition of public order. Public order belongs to a so called vague legal terms...

Les femmes représentent 15 % des mis en cause, 10 % des condamnés et 3 % des détenus. La criminalité féminine se caractérise ainsi par sa marginalité, tout autant que par son atypicité. La propension criminelle de la femme serait infime et limitée à certaines infractions spécifiques. Malgré une égalité pénale formelle entre les hommes et les femmes, leurs criminalités ne se confondent pas. Pour autant, elles ne sont pas non plus totalement dissociables, les facteurs criminogènes étant semblables quel que soit le sexe de l'auteur de l'infraction. Si certaines infractions sont plus spécifiquement féminines et d'autres plus généralement masculines, la nature de la criminalité ne diffère guère. Tel n'est pas le cas du volume de la criminalité qui se différencie considérablement en fonction du sexe. Contrairement au droit pénal qui s'illustre par son indifférence au sexe des auteurs d'infractions, la réaction pénale à la criminalité n'est pas totalement neutre. L'homme et lafemme font l'objet d'un traitement judiciaire et pénitentiaire différencié. Le sexe de l'auteur d'infraction n'est dès lors pas une variable indifférente au pénaliste puisque le sexe a une influence sur le passage à l'acte criminel et sur la réaction pénale à la criminalité. / Women account for 15 % of offenses' author, 10 % of sentenced persons and 3 % of prisoners. The female criminality is characterized as much by marginality as by atypicality. The women's criminal propensity would be tiny and limited to specific offenses. Despite the equality in criminal law between men and women, their criminalities don't merge. However, they are not completely separable since the criminogenic factors are similar regardless of the gender of the author is. If certain offenses are more specifically female and other offenses more specifically male, the nature of the criminality differs little. But this is not the case of the volume of criminality that differs significantly by gender. Unlike the criminal law illustrated by the indifference to the gender of the offenses' author, criminal response to criminality is not totally neutral. Women and men receive differential judicial andpenitentiary treatment. The sex of the offender is therefore not an indifferent variable for the penalist because sex has an influence on the transition to the crime and the criminal response to criminality.