Suchergebnisse

During the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, many financial institutions all over the world were nationalized, taken over or declared insolvent and liquidated. The experience from the crisis affirmed the importance of statutory auditors' role as gatekeepers in financial services sector. Also, the issues of statutory auditors' liability and their public role are particularly relevant in Lithuania, considering that two at the time biggest Lithuanian capital banks - Snoras and Ūkio bankas went bankrupt while having unqualified auditor's opinions issued by statutory auditors less than a year before the banks became de facto insolvent. According to European Commission (EC), after the crisis investors doubt the credibility and accuracy of the audited financial statements of banks and other financial institutions. Inspection reports from the Member States confirmed that statutory auditors lack professional skepticism and fresh thinking. Consequently, EC has initiated reform of the audit market. New legislation Directive 2014/56/EU and Regulation EU (No) 537/2014 will become applicable from June 2016. Audit malpractice cases can be defined as not typical malpractice cases, because auditors have a dual responsibility not only to their direct client, but also to third parties. This factor is especially important in financial institutions' audit malpractice cases, because they have very wide range of stakeholders who rely on auditors' reporting. The research problem - is auditor responsible for the insolvency of financial institution. The aim of the thesis is to explore the extent of auditors' liability for malpractice in the U.S. and EU, and identify areas of concern in audit market regulation. The first part of the thesis examines the prevailing approaches to auditors' liability in the U.S. and EU, as well as auditors' liability system in Lithuania. The second part of the thesis is focused on analyzing the extent of auditors' liability for malpractice in recent cases related to collapses of Lehman Brothers, Snoras and Ūkio bankas. In the third part of the thesis areas of concern in EU audit market regulation are identified. In this thesis comparative literature analysis and comprehensive review methods are used. Based on the research results, the null hypothesis - the auditor is not responsible for the insolvency of financial institution - was rejected. In a majority of jurisdictions analyzed (in the U.S. and the EU), courts favor unlimited auditors' liability, meaning that when auditors fail to fulfill their duties they are responsible not only to their client, but also to the aggrieved third parties, whose claims are usually based on tort. The rationale for that is auditors' public role. The main issue in claims filed against auditors is whether the auditors have been negligent. Intentional or unintentional violation of auditing standards as well as negligence in any degree indicate auditor's fault, and lead to liability for malpractice. Lawsuits against auditors of Lehman Brothers, Snoras and Ūkio bankas emphasized the importance of auditors obligations to the public as claims against auditors for failure to fulfill their societal role were filed by the aggrieved third parties and the authorities. The analysis of audit malpractice cases highlighted shortcomings in audit market regulation, by confirming that the quality and transparency of audit reports need to be improved as well as auditors' accountability and independence requirements adjusted in order to reduce new financial risks in the future.

During the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, many financial institutions all over the world were nationalized, taken over or declared insolvent and liquidated. The experience from the crisis affirmed the importance of statutory auditors' role as gatekeepers in financial services sector. Also, the issues of statutory auditors' liability and their public role are particularly relevant in Lithuania, considering that two at the time biggest Lithuanian capital banks - Snoras and Ūkio bankas went bankrupt while having unqualified auditor's opinions issued by statutory auditors less than a year before the banks became de facto insolvent. According to European Commission (EC), after the crisis investors doubt the credibility and accuracy of the audited financial statements of banks and other financial institutions. Inspection reports from the Member States confirmed that statutory auditors lack professional skepticism and fresh thinking. Consequently, EC has initiated reform of the audit market. New legislation Directive 2014/56/EU and Regulation EU (No) 537/2014 will become applicable from June 2016. Audit malpractice cases can be defined as not typical malpractice cases, because auditors have a dual responsibility not only to their direct client, but also to third parties. This factor is especially important in financial institutions' audit malpractice cases, because they have very wide range of stakeholders who rely on auditors' reporting. The research problem - is auditor responsible for the insolvency of financial institution. The aim of the thesis is to explore the extent of auditors' liability for malpractice in the U.S. and EU, and identify areas of concern in audit market regulation. The first part of the thesis examines the prevailing approaches to auditors' liability in the U.S. and EU, as well as auditors' liability system in Lithuania. The second part of the thesis is focused on analyzing the extent of auditors' liability for malpractice in recent cases related to collapses of Lehman Brothers, Snoras and Ūkio bankas. In the third part of the thesis areas of concern in EU audit market regulation are identified. In this thesis comparative literature analysis and comprehensive review methods are used. Based on the research results, the null hypothesis - the auditor is not responsible for the insolvency of financial institution - was rejected. In a majority of jurisdictions analyzed (in the U.S. and the EU), courts favor unlimited auditors' liability, meaning that when auditors fail to fulfill their duties they are responsible not only to their client, but also to the aggrieved third parties, whose claims are usually based on tort. The rationale for that is auditors' public role. The main issue in claims filed against auditors is whether the auditors have been negligent. Intentional or unintentional violation of auditing standards as well as negligence in any degree indicate auditor's fault, and lead to liability for malpractice. Lawsuits against auditors of Lehman Brothers, Snoras and Ūkio bankas emphasized the importance of auditors obligations to the public as claims against auditors for failure to fulfill their societal role were filed by the aggrieved third parties and the authorities. The analysis of audit malpractice cases highlighted shortcomings in audit market regulation, by confirming that the quality and transparency of audit reports need to be improved as well as auditors' accountability and independence requirements adjusted in order to reduce new financial risks in the future.

During the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, many financial institutions all over the world were nationalized, taken over or declared insolvent and liquidated. The experience from the crisis affirmed the importance of statutory auditors' role as gatekeepers in financial services sector. Also, the issues of statutory auditors' liability and their public role are particularly relevant in Lithuania, considering that two at the time biggest Lithuanian capital banks - Snoras and Ūkio bankas went bankrupt while having unqualified auditor's opinions issued by statutory auditors less than a year before the banks became de facto insolvent. According to European Commission (EC), after the crisis investors doubt the credibility and accuracy of the audited financial statements of banks and other financial institutions. Inspection reports from the Member States confirmed that statutory auditors lack professional skepticism and fresh thinking. Consequently, EC has initiated reform of the audit market. New legislation Directive 2014/56/EU and Regulation EU (No) 537/2014 will become applicable from June 2016. Audit malpractice cases can be defined as not typical malpractice cases, because auditors have a dual responsibility not only to their direct client, but also to third parties. This factor is especially important in financial institutions' audit malpractice cases, because they have very wide range of stakeholders who rely on auditors' reporting. The research problem - is auditor responsible for the insolvency of financial institution. The aim of the thesis is to explore the extent of auditors' liability for malpractice in the U.S. and EU, and identify areas of concern in audit market regulation. The first part of the thesis examines the prevailing approaches to auditors' liability in the U.S. and EU, as well as auditors' liability system in Lithuania. The second part of the thesis is focused on analyzing the extent of auditors' liability for malpractice in recent cases related to collapses of Lehman Brothers, Snoras and Ūkio bankas. In the third part of the thesis areas of concern in EU audit market regulation are identified. In this thesis comparative literature analysis and comprehensive review methods are used. Based on the research results, the null hypothesis - the auditor is not responsible for the insolvency of financial institution - was rejected. In a majority of jurisdictions analyzed (in the U.S. and the EU), courts favor unlimited auditors' liability, meaning that when auditors fail to fulfill their duties they are responsible not only to their client, but also to the aggrieved third parties, whose claims are usually based on tort. The rationale for that is auditors' public role. The main issue in claims filed against auditors is whether the auditors have been negligent. Intentional or unintentional violation of auditing standards as well as negligence in any degree indicate auditor's fault, and lead to liability for malpractice. Lawsuits against auditors of Lehman Brothers, Snoras and Ūkio bankas emphasized the importance of auditors obligations to the public as claims against auditors for failure to fulfill their societal role were filed by the aggrieved third parties and the authorities. The analysis of audit malpractice cases highlighted shortcomings in audit market regulation, by confirming that the quality and transparency of audit reports need to be improved as well as auditors' accountability and independence requirements adjusted in order to reduce new financial risks in the future.

Central and Eastern European countries had a process of privatising financial institutions in 1990's as the right way to a market economy. The world has been shaken by the global financial crisis of 2008-2009 and as certain distrust of private-owned financial institutions started to evolve, state authorities were pushed to punish the distressed financial institutions and their managers and public funds were diverted from social projects to bank rescue schemes. The world is facing various stress scenarios and challenges today that might influence the fundamental system of private property of financial institutions. Financial institutions are the principal mechanisms for money circulation and a precondition for successful economic development. The change in financial institutions property status may consequently influence the pace of development of certain aspects of the economy. However, property rights cannot be accounted as an uninfringeable fortress of the entitlement theory because a modern social and economic policy state seeks to transfer them, especially when the goal is preserving a state as such in a stress scenario. This research is dedicated to justify the thesis hypothesis that property rights of financial institutions can be legally infringed by a government performing deprivatisation from the perspective of the public interest in a stress scenario. Property rights and their theoretical implications are being examined throughout the thesis from the perspective of the public interest. Financial institutions and their critical situations are analysed from the perspective of their deprivatisation and the historical events of the 2008-2009 global financial crisis. Stress scenario situations are outlined with the public interest's influence on a government's actions in the deprivatisation of financial institutions. The status of financial institutions in a stress scenario is discussed and recommendations for an efficient deprivatisation are presented from the perspective of property rights. Finally, case law on the legality of a deprivatisation is studied and recommendations for litigating deprivatisation are presented. The hypothesis of the thesis is justified through the most important conclusion that a state's intervention in the financial sector is inevitable in a stress scenario to protect scarce financial resources and their efficient allocation, social security, state administration and the state as such even by infringing property rights in deprivatisation process performed within the limits of the eminent domain theory. The legitimacy of a state's decisions has to be evaluated by courts, otherwise governments could just proceed with deprivatisation procedures and there would be no public challenges for these actions of governments.

Central and Eastern European countries had a process of privatising financial institutions in 1990's as the right way to a market economy. The world has been shaken by the global financial crisis of 2008-2009 and as certain distrust of private-owned financial institutions started to evolve, state authorities were pushed to punish the distressed financial institutions and their managers and public funds were diverted from social projects to bank rescue schemes. The world is facing various stress scenarios and challenges today that might influence the fundamental system of private property of financial institutions. Financial institutions are the principal mechanisms for money circulation and a precondition for successful economic development. The change in financial institutions property status may consequently influence the pace of development of certain aspects of the economy. However, property rights cannot be accounted as an uninfringeable fortress of the entitlement theory because a modern social and economic policy state seeks to transfer them, especially when the goal is preserving a state as such in a stress scenario. This research is dedicated to justify the thesis hypothesis that property rights of financial institutions can be legally infringed by a government performing deprivatisation from the perspective of the public interest in a stress scenario. Property rights and their theoretical implications are being examined throughout the thesis from the perspective of the public interest. Financial institutions and their critical situations are analysed from the perspective of their deprivatisation and the historical events of the 2008-2009 global financial crisis. Stress scenario situations are outlined with the public interest's influence on a government's actions in the deprivatisation of financial institutions. The status of financial institutions in a stress scenario is discussed and recommendations for an efficient deprivatisation are presented from the perspective of property rights. Finally, case law on the legality of a deprivatisation is studied and recommendations for litigating deprivatisation are presented. The hypothesis of the thesis is justified through the most important conclusion that a state's intervention in the financial sector is inevitable in a stress scenario to protect scarce financial resources and their efficient allocation, social security, state administration and the state as such even by infringing property rights in deprivatisation process performed within the limits of the eminent domain theory. The legitimacy of a state's decisions has to be evaluated by courts, otherwise governments could just proceed with deprivatisation procedures and there would be no public challenges for these actions of governments.

Central and Eastern European countries had a process of privatising financial institutions in 1990's as the right way to a market economy. The world has been shaken by the global financial crisis of 2008-2009 and as certain distrust of private-owned financial institutions started to evolve, state authorities were pushed to punish the distressed financial institutions and their managers and public funds were diverted from social projects to bank rescue schemes. The world is facing various stress scenarios and challenges today that might influence the fundamental system of private property of financial institutions. Financial institutions are the principal mechanisms for money circulation and a precondition for successful economic development. The change in financial institutions property status may consequently influence the pace of development of certain aspects of the economy. However, property rights cannot be accounted as an uninfringeable fortress of the entitlement theory because a modern social and economic policy state seeks to transfer them, especially when the goal is preserving a state as such in a stress scenario. This research is dedicated to justify the thesis hypothesis that property rights of financial institutions can be legally infringed by a government performing deprivatisation from the perspective of the public interest in a stress scenario. Property rights and their theoretical implications are being examined throughout the thesis from the perspective of the public interest. Financial institutions and their critical situations are analysed from the perspective of their deprivatisation and the historical events of the 2008-2009 global financial crisis. Stress scenario situations are outlined with the public interest's influence on a government's actions in the deprivatisation of financial institutions. The status of financial institutions in a stress scenario is discussed and recommendations for an efficient deprivatisation are presented from the perspective of property rights. Finally, case law on the legality of a deprivatisation is studied and recommendations for litigating deprivatisation are presented. The hypothesis of the thesis is justified through the most important conclusion that a state's intervention in the financial sector is inevitable in a stress scenario to protect scarce financial resources and their efficient allocation, social security, state administration and the state as such even by infringing property rights in deprivatisation process performed within the limits of the eminent domain theory. The legitimacy of a state's decisions has to be evaluated by courts, otherwise governments could just proceed with deprivatisation procedures and there would be no public challenges for these actions of governments.

Fundamental changes in public sector institutions management of the last few decades, related to the new public management and the principles of good governance, conditioned a need for an accounting reform in public finance (Brusca, Montesinos, 2010). When these reforms started governments had to move to accounting management based on the principle of accrual and prepare financial reports that: 1)give more precise information, 2) provide basis for financial situation analysis and evaluation of public sector subjects, 3) create preconditions for comparison of financial situation analysis and financial results, 4) provide the users of financial reports with a possibility to make more effective decisions on the use and management of resources. [.]

Fundamental changes in public sector institutions management of the last few decades, related to the new public management and the principles of good governance, conditioned a need for an accounting reform in public finance (Brusca, Montesinos, 2010). When these reforms started governments had to move to accounting management based on the principle of accrual and prepare financial reports that: 1)give more precise information, 2) provide basis for financial situation analysis and evaluation of public sector subjects, 3) create preconditions for comparison of financial situation analysis and financial results, 4) provide the users of financial reports with a possibility to make more effective decisions on the use and management of resources. [.]

Fundamental changes in public sector institutions management of the last few decades, related to the new public management and the principles of good governance, conditioned a need for an accounting reform in public finance (Brusca, Montesinos, 2010). When these reforms started governments had to move to accounting management based on the principle of accrual and prepare financial reports that: 1)give more precise information, 2) provide basis for financial situation analysis and evaluation of public sector subjects, 3) create preconditions for comparison of financial situation analysis and financial results, 4) provide the users of financial reports with a possibility to make more effective decisions on the use and management of resources. [.]

Fundamental changes in public sector institutions management of the last few decades, related to the new public management and the principles of good governance, conditioned a need for an accounting reform in public finance (Brusca, Montesinos, 2010). When these reforms started governments had to move to accounting management based on the principle of accrual and prepare financial reports that: 1)give more precise information, 2) provide basis for financial situation analysis and evaluation of public sector subjects, 3) create preconditions for comparison of financial situation analysis and financial results, 4) provide the users of financial reports with a possibility to make more effective decisions on the use and management of resources. [.]

Increasing number of commercial banks and other financial institutions, complexity of their provided services and the volume of assets those institutions manage poses new challenges for countries in implementing proper financial sector supervision. In order to ensure appropriate supervision of the financial sector, it is necessary to establish explicit legal requirements for the activities of financial institutions. Therefore, the aim of this work is to discuss what legal regulation is established for the business conduct supervision in Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom. In order to present the legal regulation of business conduct supervision, the legal acts of Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom regulating the provision of payment, credit and insurance services were used. The analysis of business conduct supervision was based not only on legislation adopted by national parliaments, but also on rules and guidelines set by competent authorities. Regulation of business conduct supervision in Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom, set the focus on the information disclosure. Pre-contractual information disclosure while providing payment, credit and insurance services is probably the most important financial institution obligation. Before concluding a contract between a financial institution and its client, a person must assess whether the chosen financial service meets the client's needs. A comparison of the regulation of business conduct supervision in different European countries has shown that the scope of supervision regulation is akin. The only exception is the regulation of business conduct supervision in the United Kingdom, where financial services supervision is regulated not only by legal acts but also by practical examples from competent authorities, which allow financial services providers to practically model potential business conduct breaches.

Increasing number of commercial banks and other financial institutions, complexity of their provided services and the volume of assets those institutions manage poses new challenges for countries in implementing proper financial sector supervision. In order to ensure appropriate supervision of the financial sector, it is necessary to establish explicit legal requirements for the activities of financial institutions. Therefore, the aim of this work is to discuss what legal regulation is established for the business conduct supervision in Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom. In order to present the legal regulation of business conduct supervision, the legal acts of Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom regulating the provision of payment, credit and insurance services were used. The analysis of business conduct supervision was based not only on legislation adopted by national parliaments, but also on rules and guidelines set by competent authorities. Regulation of business conduct supervision in Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom, set the focus on the information disclosure. Pre-contractual information disclosure while providing payment, credit and insurance services is probably the most important financial institution obligation. Before concluding a contract between a financial institution and its client, a person must assess whether the chosen financial service meets the client's needs. A comparison of the regulation of business conduct supervision in different European countries has shown that the scope of supervision regulation is akin. The only exception is the regulation of business conduct supervision in the United Kingdom, where financial services supervision is regulated not only by legal acts but also by practical examples from competent authorities, which allow financial services providers to practically model potential business conduct breaches.

Increasing number of commercial banks and other financial institutions, complexity of their provided services and the volume of assets those institutions manage poses new challenges for countries in implementing proper financial sector supervision. In order to ensure appropriate supervision of the financial sector, it is necessary to establish explicit legal requirements for the activities of financial institutions. Therefore, the aim of this work is to discuss what legal regulation is established for the business conduct supervision in Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom. In order to present the legal regulation of business conduct supervision, the legal acts of Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom regulating the provision of payment, credit and insurance services were used. The analysis of business conduct supervision was based not only on legislation adopted by national parliaments, but also on rules and guidelines set by competent authorities. Regulation of business conduct supervision in Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom, set the focus on the information disclosure. Pre-contractual information disclosure while providing payment, credit and insurance services is probably the most important financial institution obligation. Before concluding a contract between a financial institution and its client, a person must assess whether the chosen financial service meets the client's needs. A comparison of the regulation of business conduct supervision in different European countries has shown that the scope of supervision regulation is akin. The only exception is the regulation of business conduct supervision in the United Kingdom, where financial services supervision is regulated not only by legal acts but also by practical examples from competent authorities, which allow financial services providers to practically model potential business conduct breaches.

Increasing number of commercial banks and other financial institutions, complexity of their provided services and the volume of assets those institutions manage poses new challenges for countries in implementing proper financial sector supervision. In order to ensure appropriate supervision of the financial sector, it is necessary to establish explicit legal requirements for the activities of financial institutions. Therefore, the aim of this work is to discuss what legal regulation is established for the business conduct supervision in Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom. In order to present the legal regulation of business conduct supervision, the legal acts of Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom regulating the provision of payment, credit and insurance services were used. The analysis of business conduct supervision was based not only on legislation adopted by national parliaments, but also on rules and guidelines set by competent authorities. Regulation of business conduct supervision in Lithuania, Estonia and the United Kingdom, set the focus on the information disclosure. Pre-contractual information disclosure while providing payment, credit and insurance services is probably the most important financial institution obligation. Before concluding a contract between a financial institution and its client, a person must assess whether the chosen financial service meets the client's needs. A comparison of the regulation of business conduct supervision in different European countries has shown that the scope of supervision regulation is akin. The only exception is the regulation of business conduct supervision in the United Kingdom, where financial services supervision is regulated not only by legal acts but also by practical examples from competent authorities, which allow financial services providers to practically model potential business conduct breaches.

The hereby submitted article deals with the Financial Arbiter (Ombudsman) and the payment systems regulation in the Czech Republic. The article focuses mainly on the proceeding before the Czech Financial Arbiter. However, the author also deals with the Financial Ombudsmen in Europe, especially those who are the members of FIN-NET (the Cross-Border Out-of-Court Complaints Network for Financial Services). The legal regulation this work describes covers up (between others) the Payment Systems Act and the Act on the Financial Arbiter, both effective from 1 January 2003. These acts were adopted by the Czech Parliament under the harmonization of the Czech law with the European Community law standards, e.g. with the European Community Directive No. 97/5/EC, on cross-boarder transfers, which requires the possibility for consumers to settle disputes in an efficient and appropriate manner with transfer institutions through out-of-court procedures.