Fourth Circuit Interprets Corporate Knowledge And Materiality Under FCA
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.08.04
In United States ex rel. Harrison v. Westinghouse Savannah River Co. (Dec. 19, 2003), the Fourth Circuit upheld a civil penalty of $195,000 ($7500 times 26 invoices) because the false cert "negatively affected the integrity of the bidding process," although zero actual damages were proven. The court held that (a) the False Claims Act's "knowledge" element was satisfied when one employee of the corporate defendant had knowledge of the facts making the corporation's certification false, even though there was no evidence that the same employee knew that the cert was required or even that it had been submitted; and (b) the false cert (that no organizational conflict of interest (OCI) existed in connection with a subcontract award) was "material" because it would have "had a natural tendency to influence" the government's decision to fund the subcontract "if it had known the full details" at the time of award, even though the government in fact concluded that no OCI existed when it subsequently learned of the issue and continued to pay for the subcontract work thereafter.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.03.26
Important EU Court Judgment Clarifies Rules on Interest Due in Cartel Damages Cases
In a judgment that will have direct and immediate consequences, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has clarified that for all competition damages actions brought after 26 December 2014, interest runs from the date on which the harm occurred. The ruling addressed two important questions: (1) whether national provisions implementing Article 3(2) of the EU Damages Directive — which requires interest to run from the date harm occurred —apply to cases in which the harm preceded the adoption of those provisions; and (2) how the date of harm should be determined in cartel cases involving the purchase of goods at inflated prices.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.02.26
SBA OHA Confirms That the Submission Date for a Proposal with Pricing Controls Size Determination
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
