Accordingly, the claim for loss of profits on contracts is time barred and the Panel has considered the original claim for the loss of receivables.

Claim Nos. 5000309 and 4002545 relate to loss of agricultural resources.

Claim No. 5000327 is for the loss of Turkey's forestry resources.

The E4 Panel recommended no compensation for loss of stock and loss of profits when it reviewed the claim.

Saudi Arabia states that there was loss of marine turtles, but it does not claim compensation for that loss.

The individual claimant whose claim had been identified as potentially overlapping with the E4 claim has provided evidence in the form of audited financial statements and invoices to support the claim for loss of stock and loss of profits.

Claim No. 5000460 Loss of natural resources Claim No. 5000460 comprises three claim units, with a total asserted value of USD 967,831,391, for loss of ecological and human services resulting from damage to or depletion of terrestrial, marine and groundwater resources.

The E4 Panel recommended compensation for loss of tangible property, but not for loss of stock, when it reviewed the claim.

The Palestinian individual claimant whose claim had been identified as potentially overlapping with the E4 claim has provided evidence to support the claim for loss of stock.

Aquatic biota Kuwait states that its claim for loss of aquatic biota includes loss of ecological services provided by the subtidal areas.

Iraq further states that the claim for loss of well being is merely theoretical.

The claimant asserted his claim on the category D claim form as follows USD 112,600,000 for loss of tangible business property, USD 54,725,600 for loss of business income and USD 3,675,000 for payment of relief to others.

The Panel recommends compensation in relation to the claim for loss of support and MPA.

Specifically, the secretariat, in valuing the loss of income component of the claimant's D8 D9 (individual business) loss claim, used an incorrect average monthly income amount.

In one case, UNCC claim No. 3011337, all 55 purchase invoices provided by the claimant in support of his loss of stock claim were so altered.

The first claim unit is for damage to terrestrial resources the second claim unit is for damage to Kuwait's marine and coastal resources and the third claim unit is for the loss of groundwater resources.

Review of the E2 claim Applying the procedures described in paragraph 67, the Panel reviewed the E2 claim in this instalment according to the loss types identified below.

He described the claim for loss of business income as a claim for unpaid instalments due and owing for works already carried out in connection with the projects.

Claim No. 5000304 Loss of natural resources Claim No. 5000304 comprises five claim units, with an asserted value of USD 4,330,635,352, for depletion of natural resources as a result of Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait.

One claim was for an unspecified property loss and the other was for property purchased in Iraq in 1993.

Iraq challenges the claim that the loss of water resources was due to the invasion and occupation of Kuwait.

Specifically, the secretariat, in valuing the claimant's D6 (loss of income) claim, applied an incorrect multiplier to the claimant's monthly income.

As a result of this clerical error, the Panel recommended no compensation for the claimant's DS (Other) loss claim for school fees.

The Panel finds that the evidence provided to support this claim unit is not sufficient to demonstrate the circumstances of the loss claimed.

Since the Government of Kuwait has not suffered any direct loss, Iraq states that this part of the claim unit should be dismissed.

With respect to the claim for receivables, the Panel finds that the evidence adduced by the claimant in support of this component of the claim is insufficient to demonstrate the circumstances and quantum of any loss.

Where the Panel is of the view that insufficient evidence was given to support either the fact of loss or the value of loss, the Panel has adjusted the claim to account for this risk of overstatement.

Specifically, the secretariat incorrectly concluded that the component of the claimant's claim for D8 D9 (individual business) losses relating to loss of income had been withdrawn and, accordingly, failed to present this loss item to the Panel.

For example, in UNCC claim No. 3011224 the claimant asserted, in addition to her own losses, a salary loss on behalf of her husband.

Syria's claim for loss of livestock covers the whole country even though the areas of concentrated sheep herds are located in only six governorates.

The claim unit is for loss in fish catch caused by the delay as well as project expenses incurred during the period of the delay.

Further, Iraq states that the claim should be rejected because it quantifies the loss by using a modelling approach and not by using concrete evidence.

The average number of loss types per claim is higher in this instalment than for claims in the regular category D claims programme as a whole.

In the view of Iraq, the claim is unjustified because of the insufficient evidence provided and the absence of proof that any loss was incurred by Kuwait.

In the claim under review, the Panel finds that the claimant has not provided sufficient evidence in support of the alleged contracts and recommends no compensation for the loss.

It argues that the entire claim is unjustified because no loss has been demonstrated, and it is unreasonable because the information on costs provided by Iran is incomplete and flawed.

The claim unit reviewed in this report is for compensation for the loss incurred as a result of the damage to subtidal habitats until they recover to pre invasion conditions.

According to Iraq, without any strong evidence of ecological loss in these habitats, there does not appear to be any basis for the claim in respect of the subtidal areas.

Iraq states that Kuwait's claim for loss of individual well being is inadmissible because it relates to losses suffered directly by individuals who could have submitted such claims to the Commission.

In the view of the Panel, there is no provision in the relevant resolutions of the Security Council or decisions of the Governing Council which prevents a government from bringing a claim for a public health loss, damage or injury for which it would be entitled to claim under international law.

As stated above, the eligible category D Palestinian late claims have a higher number of loss types per claim and substantially higher amounts claimed than claims in the regular category D claims programme.

The claim preparers were often listed as the contact persons in the claim files and some claim files included attestations from the claim preparers opining on the merits of the claim.

Other claims with this loss type relate to loss of cash.

The sixth claim unit is for claim preparation costs.

The fifth claim unit is for claim preparation costs.