1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Reverse False Claim Requires "Established" Obligation to Pay

Reverse False Claim Requires "Established" Obligation to Pay

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.15.16

On December 13, 2016, the Fifth Circuit, reversing the district court, held in U.S. ex rel. Simoneaux v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co that the 2009 amendments to the FCA did not abrogate its prior precedent holding that reverse false claims liability did not extend to potential or contingent obligations to pay unassessed government fines or penalties. Agreeing with both the defendant and, notably, the United States, the court concluded that, while the 2009 amendments clarified that the amount of the obligation need not be “fixed,” the duty to pay had to be “established” before liability could attach.

Insights

Client Alert | 8 min read | 09.08.26

Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa [2026] UKSC 21: Good Faith in the Boardroom

The UK Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed the appeal of Mr Francesco Costa, former chairman of Spring Media Investments Limited, in the first Supreme Court judgment to consider the scope of the duty under section 172(1) of the Companies Act 2006. The foundational position is that good faith requires honest conduct as well as honest thinking. A director's genuine belief that they are acting in the company's best interests will not excuse covert or disloyal conduct in pursuit of that belief. ...