1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |First Means First: Dismissal of Prior Related Actions No Cure For Relator’s First-to-File Defect

First Means First: Dismissal of Prior Related Actions No Cure For Relator’s First-to-File Defect

Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.15.17

The Fourth Circuit held in United States ex rel. Carter v. Halliburton – its third decision in this protracted litigation – that the False Claims Act’s first-to-file rule required dismissal of the relator’s action, because relator brought his case while related cases were pending even though those related cases had since been dismissed and the relator’s complaint subsequently amended.  The court explained that the statutory text of the first-to-file rule is “unambiguous” and “affords courts no flexibility to accommodate an improperly-filed action when its earlier-filed counterpart ceases to be pending.”  The court acknowledged that its holding “may raise statute of limitations problems” for some FCA relators, but noted that (1) the FCA’s objective of putting the government on notice of fraud was already met by the first-filed actions, and (2) FCA defendants also have an interest “in repose and avoiding stale claims outside the limitations period.”

Contacts

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....

View All Insights