First, the Panel noted that in some cases claimants clearly stated in their original claim submissions that they did not maintain audited financial statements, yet submitted audited financial statements in response to claim development notifications issued under the Rules.

Another possible reason for the discrepancy in the different numbers is that different methods and sources of data were used to develop the claims, and certain camps might have been included for purposes of one claim but not the others.

Monitoring and assessment data On 13 September 2002, the Panel decided that monitoring and assessment data received from the Claimants should be made available to Iraq.

On that date, the Panel informed the Claimants and Iraq that it would not consider any monitoring and assessment reports or data submitted after that date.

Upon review of the claims in this instalment for which audited financial statements were provided, the Panel became concerned about the authenticity of the allegedly contemporaneous audited accounts.

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.

Claims

Sixth, the Panel noted that some claims with implausibly high claimed amounts have audited financial statements supporting what appeared to be inflated losses.

For these claims, the electronic information existing in the database was compared to the paper claim forms submitted by the claimants.

review of non overlapping claims in the FOURTHsecond group of overlapping claims

Some claimants indicated that they engaged a claim preparer after seeing advertisements placed in Kuwaiti newspapers offering assistance with the filing of Palestinian late claims .

(e) Medical claims

In particular, the Panel considered that it was appropriate to propose, as needed, adjustments to such awards in the light of new information and evidence presented.

Duplicate claims

Category C corrections Recommendations for corrections to category C claims are those arising from confirmed duplicate claims, discrepancies between the electronic and paper claim formats, and multiple recovery based on the duplication of claim awards.

Stand alone claims

A similar exercise was conducted with respect to category C for the purpose of identifying duplicate claims during claims processing.

Concerning the issue of duplicate claims, the secretariat indicated that it was aware of the risk of duplicate claims from the outset of claims processing and took steps to identify and eliminate such claims during the course of claims processing.

In connection with the claims by governments for loss of life and reduced quality of life of their nationals, Iraq asserts that the claims are inadmissible because the Claimants concerned lack legal standing to bring such claims before the Commission.

The Panel notes that common traits displayed by these claim preparers include their command of the English language and familiarity with the Commission's claim development procedures and jurisprudence from the regular claims programme.

The secretariat has also used these electronic searches for duplicate claims in the Palestinian late claims programme, the Bedouin programme and the category A and C late claims programme.

You say, This photograph, it's about it depicts this person. Bing! That's data. Data, data, data.

First F4 instalment, claim Nos. 5000363, 5000408 and 5000409.

Claims and Survey Unit

The total losses alleged in the instalment therefore are USD 35,972,592.

Where a claimant claims in a currency other than Kuwaiti dinars, the Panel values the claim in Kuwaiti dinars using the appropriate exchange rate.

The present report sets out the Panel's recommendations for a fourthsecond group of overlapping claims from resolved E4 instalments (the fourthsecond group of overlapping claims ).

Valuation of secured claims

We could talk about government data, enterprise data is really important, there's scientific data, there's personal data, there's weather data, there's data about events, there's data about talks, and there's news and there's all kinds of stuff.

Third, the Panel noted that two claimants who filed competing claims for the same business provided audited financial statements from the same auditing firm for the same year with different figures.

Only unreasonable claims may be refused, but the state will bear the burden of proving unreasonableness.

Claim preparers often attended interviews with claimants and frequently acted as interpreters.

One group of claimants submitted financial statements from an auditing firm that, according to the Kuwait Ministry of Commerce and Industry, was not a licensed auditor in Kuwait and could not be located despite appeals in newspaper advertisements.

All data for 2004 are provisional.

Draft article 15 Category of claims

These claims are discussed below.

These E4 claims were considered in the second instalment of E4 claims.

This global approach was suited to the specifics of category C claims processing, as category C claims are subject to mass claims processing procedures and are not subject to extensive individual review or claim development.

Details of the claims or parts of claims that were deferred from previous F4 instalments or transferred from other claims categories are discussed in the relevant sections of this report.

Recommendations for corrections to category A claims include the following kinds of corrections duplicate claims, higher to lower amounts, family to individual and change of submitting responsible entity.

The Panel recalls that in its Sixth Instalment Report it identified three streams of claimants in order to address the varying circumstances of claimants, in particular the quality and quantity of business records available to support individual claims.

During their interviews, the claim preparers denied that they fabricated or altered evidence to bolster a claim or assisted claimants without valid losses to fabricate claims.

In addition to initial fees and disbursements, claim preparers often charged contingency fees based on the outcome of the claims.

First F4 instalment claim Nos. 5000354, 5000355, 5000356, 5000357, 5000358 and 5000430.

The Panel reviewed the potentially overlapping claims in the fourthsecond group of overlapping claims as and when the information provided by the claimants permitted an initial determination to be made on the existence of overlap.