The Auditor and Fraud Detection
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE AUDITOR AND FRAUD DETECTION: AN INTERPRETATION OF THE COMPANIES ACTS FROM 1844 TO 1989 BY PAUL H001 HEAN SAW THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY MARCH 1992 Sheffield University Management School Crookesmoor Building Conduit Road Sheffield DECLARATION No portion of the work referred to in this thesis has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other University or other Institute of Learning. DEDICATION To my mother and sister whom I love dearly TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No LIST OF CASES CITED xiv LIST OF FIGURES xviii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xx ABSTRACT xxii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 1.0 PRELUDE 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 GENERAL PROBLEM AREA OF FRAUD 2 1.2.1 THE GROWING CRIME 2 1.2.2 GROWTH OF RECORDED FRAUD AND CONVICTED FRAUDSTERS 3 1.2.3 THE GROWTH OF FRAUD INTERNATIONALLY 5 1.2.4 PERCEPTIONS OF THE GROWTH OF FRAUD 5 1.3 THE IMPACT OF FRAUD 6 1.3.1 COMPUTER FRAUD 6 1.3.2 THE COST OF FRAUD 7 1.3.3 THE SOCIAL AND POLITICAL IMPACT OF FRAUD 8 1.3.4 THE LEGAL PROCESS OF FRAUD CONTROL 10 1.3.5 THE POLICING OF COMMERCIAL FRAUD 10 1.4 WHAT IS FRAUD? 10 1.5 FRAMEWORK OF THE THESIS 12 1.6 ENVOI 14 i Page No CHAPTER 2: PROBLEM DEFINITION 16 2.0 PRELUDE 16 2.1 INTRODUCTION 16 2.2 EXTANT ROLE OF THE AUDITOR TOWARDS FRAUD 18 DETECTION, PREVENTION AND REPORTING 2.2.1 LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES 18 A CASE LAW DIRECTIVES 18 B STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS 19 i GENERAL COMPANY LEGISLATION 19 II SPECIFIC FINANCIAL SERVICES LEGISLATION 21 2.2.2 PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES 24 A AUDITING GUIDANCE 25 B ETHICAL GUIDANCE 27 2.3 PUBLIC'S PERCEPTION OF THE AUDITOR'S ROLE 29 2.4 NATURE OF THE EXPECTATION GAP 31 2.5 RESEARCH PROBLEM HIGHLIGHTED AND ITS 34 SIGNIFICANCE 2.6 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 36 2.7 RESEARCH APPROACH 38 2.8 ENVOI 38 CHAPTER 3: SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH 40 3.0 PRELUDE 40 3.1 INTRODUCTION 40 3.2 PAST UK RESEARCH STUDIES 42 3.2.1 LEE SURVEY(1970) 42 3.2.2 FLINT STUDY (1984) 45 ii Page No 3.2.3 DAVISON REPORT (1985) 46 3.2.4 BENSON REPORT (1985) 46 3.2.5 GOULDING REPORT (1986) 47 3.2.6 ALLAN & FFORDE STUDY (1986) 49 3.3 PAST NON-UK RESEARCH STUDIES 50 3.3.1 BECK SURVEY (1973) 50 3.3.2 ARTHUR ANDERSEN STUDY (1974) 51 3.3.3 CARMICHAEL REPORT (1975) 52 3.3.4 BARON ET AL SURVEY (1977) 53 3.3.5 COHEN COMMISSION (1978) 53 3.3.6 DONAHUE INVESTIGATION (1979) 54 3.3.7 TREADWAY COMMISSION (1987) 55 3.3.8 MACDONALD COMMISSION (1988) 56 3.4 METHODOLOGICAL SUMMARY OF PAST EMPIRICAL 57 RESEARCH 3.5 REVIEW OF OTHER UK ACADEMIC ARTICLES AND 60 BOOKS 3.6 THEORETICAL SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEWED 62 3.7 ENVOI 63 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 65 4.0 PRELUDE 65 4.1 INTRODUCTION 65 4.2 BACKGROUND 66 4.2.1 BASIC FOCUS 69 4.2.2 BASIC FEATURES 70 4.2.3 BASIC IMPLICATIONS 72 4.3 THE APPROACH 75 4.3.1 THE PHRASE 75 iii Page No 4.3.2 CLARIFYING THE TERMS 75 4.3.3 EISI AND THE EPIPHANY 77 4.4 THE EISI PROCESS 80 4.4.1 FRAMING 81 4.4.2 CONTEXTUALISATION 83 4.4.3 CAPTURE 84 4.4.4 BRACKETING 85 4.4.5 CONSTRUCTION 87 4.4.6 CONSOLIDATION 88 4.5 DIAGRAMMATIC SUMMARY OF EISI 89 4.6 ENVOI 91 CHAPTER 5: DATA COLLECTION 93 5.0 PRELUDE 93 5.1 INTRODUCTION 93 5.2 CAPTURE 95 5.2.1 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 1 97 5.2.2 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 2 98 5.2.3 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 5 99 5.2.4 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 9 100 5.2.5 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 13 101 5.2.6 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 21 102 5.2.7 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 22 103 5.2.8 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 23 104 5.2.9 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 29 105 5.2.10 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 30 106 5.2.11 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 31 109 iv Page No 5.2.12 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 33 111 5.2.13 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 37 114 5.2.14 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 39 115 5.2.15 COMPANIES ACT (REG Co) No 41 118 5.3 ENVOI 121 CHAPTER 6: THE MINI STAGE 122 6.0 PRELUDE 122 6.1 INTRODUCTION 122 6.2 BRACKETING 124 6.2.1 THE CANONS OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 124 6.2.1.1 THE LITERAL RULE 127 6.2.1.2 THE CONTEXTUAL RULE 130 6.2.1.3 THE PURPOSIVE RULE 132 6.2.1.4 THE JUDICIAL RULE 135 6.2.1.5 SUB CONCLUSION 139 6.2.2 CODING 140 6.3 JOINT STOCK COMPANIES ACT 1844 142 6.4 JOINT STOCK BANKS ACT 1844 145 6.5 JOINT STOCK COMPANIES ACT 1856 147 6.6 COMPANIES ACT 1862 151 6.7 COMPANIES ACT 1879 155 6.8 COMPANIES ACT 1900 164 6.9 COMPANIES ACT 1907 168 6.10 COMPANIES (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1908 171 6.11 COMPANIES ACT 1929 177 6.12 COMPANIES ACT 1947 178 V Page No 6.13 COMPANIES ACT 1948 182 6.14 COMPANIES ACT 1967 184 6.15 COMPANIES ACT 1981 189 6.16 COMPANIES ACT 1985 194 6.17 COMPANIES ACT 1989 196 199 6.18 ENVOI CHAPTER 7: THE MICRO STAGE 201 7.0 PRELUDE 201 7.1 INTRODUCTION 201 7.2 CONSTRUCTION 203 7.3 THE MICRO LITERAL STAGE 204 7.3.1 MICRO LITERAL GRAPH 204 7.3.2 OBSERVATION 204 7.3.3 COMMENT 206 7.3.3.1 PROGRESSIVE SPECIFICITY 206 7.3.3.2 CLARITY 207 7.3.3.2.1 TRUE AND FAIR 208 7.3.3.2.2 JUDICIAL APPLICATION 209 7.3.3.2.3 STATUTORY DEFINITION/ INTERPRETATION SECTIONS 209 7.3.3.2.4 INTERPRETATION ACTS 211 7.3.3.2.5 DICTIONARIES 211 7.3.3.2.6 PRINCIPLES OF LANGUAGE 215 7.3.3.3 IMPLICIT vs EXPLICIT 216 7.3.3.4 LENGTH 216 7.3.3.4.1 USER'S NEEDS 217 7.3.3.4.2 REFERENTIAL SYSTEM 218 VI Page No 7.3.3.5 PRIMACY OF WORDS 219 7.3.4 SUB CONCLUSION 220 7.4 THE MICRO CONTEXTUAL STAGE 211 7.4.1 MICRO CONTEXTUAL GRAPH 211 7.4.2 OBSERVATION 223 7.4.3 COMMENT 223 7.4.3.1 ALTERNATIVE MEANINGS 223 7.4.3.2 IMPLICIT vs EXPLICIT 225 7.4.3.3 CROSS-REFERENCING 225 7.4.3.4 JUDICIAL APPLICATION 225 7.4.4 SUB CONCLUSION 226 7.5 THE MICRO PURPOSIVE STAGE 227 7.5.1 MICRO PURPOSIVE GRAPH 227 7.5.2 OBSERVATION 229 7.5.3 EXPLANATION 229 7.5.3.1 JOINT STOCK COMPANIES ACT 1844 230 7.5.3.2 JOINT STOCK BANKS ACT 1844 231 7.5.3.3 JOINT STOCK COMPANIES ACT 1856 232 7.5.3.4 COMPANIES ACT 1879 233 7.5.3.5 COMPANIES ACT 1900 237 7.5.3.6 COMPANIES ACT 1907 242 7.5.3.7 COMPANIES ACT 1947 243 7.5.3.8 SUB CONCLUSION 250 7.5.4 COMMENT 251 7.5.4.1 INFLUENCES ON LEGISLATION 251 . 7.5.4.1.1 A PRODUCT OF CIRCUMSTANCES 252 7.5.4.1.2 A PRODUCT OF PERSPECTIVES 254 VII Page No 7.5.4.1.3 A PRODUCT OF SHARED FUNCTIONAL REPRESENTATION 255 7.5.4.1.4 A PRODUCT OF GOVERNMENT'S FREEDOM 259 7.5.4.1.5 A PRODUCT OF THE DRAFTSMAN 260 7.5.4.1.6 A PRODUCT OF FORESEEABILITY 261 7.5.4.1.7 A PRODUCT OF LANGUAGE 262 7.5.4.1.8 A PRODUCT OF OTHER FACTORS 263 7.5.4.1.9 SUB CONCLUSION 263 7.5.4.2 THE NOTION OF 'PURPOSE' OR 'INTENTION' 264 7.5.4.2.1 A UNIFORM CONSENSUS? 264 7.5.4.2.2 AGENCY 265 7.5.4.2.3 PARLIAMENTARY TIME 266 7.5.4.2.4 A POLITICAL PARTY'S PURPOSE 267 7.5.4.2.5 A MULTI-FACETED STATUTE 267 7.5.4.2.6 IMPLICIT vs EXPLICIT 268 7.5.4.2.7 SUB CONCLUSION 269 7.5.5 CONCLUSION 26.9 7.6 THE MICRO JUDICIAL STAGE 270 7.6.1 MICRO JUDICIAL GRAPH 270 7.6.2 OBSERVATION 270 7.6.3 COMMENT 272 7.6.3.1 JUDICIAL APPLICATION 272 7.6.3.1.1 INTENTION OF PARLIAMENT - A MYTH? 273 7.6.3.1.2 FRINGE MEANINGS 274 7.6.3.1.3 MEANING vs FACTS 274 7.6.3.1.4 INTERPRETER OR LEGISLATOR? 276 Page No 7.6.3.1.5 SUB CONCLUSION 277 7.6.3.2 JUDICIAL CHARACTERISTICS 277 7.6.3.2.1 AUTHORITATIVE 277 7.6.3.2.2 BINDING PRECEDENT 278 7.6.3.2.3 DISINTERESTEDNESS 282 7.6.3.2.4 NON-PURPOSIVE 283 7.6.3.2.5 EX-POST 284 7.6.3.3 LEGAL EFFECTIVENESS 285 7.6.4 SUB CONCLUSION 286 7.7 ENVOI 290 CHAFFER 8: THE MACRO STAGE 291 8.0 PRELUDE 291 8.1 INTRODUCTION 291 8.2 CONSOLIDATION 293 8.2.1 MACRO GRAPH 294 8.2.2 OBSERVATION 294 8.3 COMMENT 296 8.3.1 JUDICIAL MODE 296 8.3.1.1 LITERAL PREFERENCE 296 8.3.1.2 THE DRAFTSMAN AND THE COURTS 297 8.3.1.2.1 LACK OF DRAFTSMAN'S COOPERATION 2.98 8.3.1.2.2 DRAFTSMAN'S OVERREACTION 29.9 8.3.1.3 OTHER SUGGESTED APPROACHES 299 8.3.1.4 NON-PURPOSIVE 302 8.3.1.4.1 THE BASIS 302 ix Page No 8.3.1.4.2 PARLIAMENTARY MATERIALS 303 8.3.1.4.3 PRE PARLIAMENTARY MATERIALS 306 8.3.1.4.4 THE ARGUMENTS 308 8.3.1.4.5 THE COUNTER-ARGUMENTS 311 8.3.1.4.6 SUB CONCLUSION 312 8.3.2 LEGAL EFFECTIVENESS 314 8.3.2.1 INTELLIGIBILITY 315 8.3.2.1.1 JUDICIAL EXASPERATION 315 8.3.2.1.2 USER EXASPERATION 316 8.3.2.1.3 CLARITY AND SIMPLICITY 317 8.3.2.1.4 THE LAYMAN vs EXPERT DILEMMA 317 8.3.2.1.5 INERTIA 319 8.3.3 LITERALISM REVISITED 320 8.3.3.1 THE INTENTION OF PARLIAMENT 320 8.3.3.2 LITERAL vs JUDICIAL 321 8.3.3.3 LITERAL vs PURPOSIVE 321 8.3.3.4 LITERAL vs CONTEXTUAL 321 8.3.3.5 A CRITIQUE 322 8.3.3.6 FURTHER DEBATES 323 8.3.4 THE FUTURE 325 8.3.4.1 THE PRESENT JUDICIAL STANDPOINT 326 8.3.4.2 THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ACT 1972 328 8.3.4.3 ENGLISH vs EUROPEAN LAW 328 8.3.4.4 IMPLICATIONS FOR UK COURTS 330 8.4 ENVOI 333 x Page No CHAPTER 9: CONCLUSION 338 9.0 PRELUDE 338 9.1 INTRODUCTION 338 9.2 CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS 340 9.2.1 COMPANY LAW AS THE SURROGATE BASIS 340 9.2.2 REFLECTIONS ON STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 340 9.2.2.1 THE NEED 340 9.2.2.2 THE DANGERS 341 9.2.2.3 DISEMBODIMENT 342 9.2.2.4 THE CHANGE 342 9.2.2.5 THE EXPECTATION GAP 343 9.2.2.6 SUB CONCLUSION 344 9.2.3 REFLECTIONS ON STATUTE LAW 345 9.2.3.1 THE IDEAL vs OBSERVED FACTS 345 9.2.3.2.1 THE LAW (PURPOSIVE) vs THE COURTS (NON-PURPOSIVE) 345 9.2.3.2.2 OBEDIENCE vs REVOLT 345 9.2.3.2.3 FOR THE LAWYER OR LAYMAN? 346 9.2.3.2.4 GENERAL vs SPECIFIC RESOLUTION 346 9.2.3.2 SYMBOLS FOR THE 'WEAK vs THE 'STRONG' 347 9.2.3.3 THE STRUGGLE TO UNDERSTAND AND DEFINE 348 9.2.3.4 SUB CONCLUSION 348 9.2.4 REFLECTIONS ON SELF-REFLEXIVITY 34.9 9.2.4.1 UNDERSTANDING IS BEING 349 9.2.4.2 UNDERSTANDING IS DIALECTIC 349 9.2.4.3 UNDERSTANDING IS LANGUAGE 350 xi Page No 9.2.4.4 UNDERSTANDING IS INTERPRETATION 350 9.2.4.5 UNDERSTANDING IS TAINTED 351 9.2.4.6 SUB CONCLUSION 351 9.2.5 CONCLUSION 352 9.3 METHODOLOGY 352 9.3.1 CONTRIBUTIONS 352 9.3.1.1 FAIRLY ORIGINAL 352 9.3.1.1.1 GENERAL APPLICATION 353 9.3.1.2 METHODICAL 353 9.3.1.3 EPIPHANIC 353 9.3.1.3.1