The fifth F4 instalment includes a number of claims or parts of claims that were deferred from previous F4 instalments or transferred from other claims categories.

Bedoun claims

CRITERIA for determining the existence of overlapping claims

Second F4 report, paragraph 25 Third F4 report, paragraph 38 Fourth F4 report, part one, paragraph 39.

The E4 population consists of claims submitted by, or on behalf of, Kuwaiti private sector corporations and entities, other than oil sector and environmental claimants, eligible to file claims under the Commission's Claim Forms for Corporations and Other Entities .

Claims in category C (individual claims for damages up to 100,000)

Audit of travel claims

Claims suspended by the Commission

Falsified medical insurance claims

There have been many claims of human rights abuses.

Claims in category A (departure from Iraq or Kuwait)

On 23 September 2002, the OIOS issued two reports containing interim audit observations and recommendations concerning three of the four claims in part two of the third instalment of F3 claims.

Table 3 identifies the country concerned, the instalments to be adjusted, the number of claims affected, and the net effect of the adjustments.

Accessibility of restitution claims procedures

REVIEW OF THE FIFTH INSTALMENT OF F4 CLAIMS Article 36 of the Rules Article 36 of the Rules provides that a panel of Commissioners may (a) in unusually large or complex cases, request further written submissions and invite individuals, corporations or other entities, Governments or international organizations to present their views in oral proceedings and (b) request additional information from any other source, including expert advice, as necessary .

The rest of the victims had not yet presented claims for damages.

Disputed and reserved claims refunded

Total travel claims processed 9 036 9 100 9 500

That the authors' claims were joined with the claims of another set of individuals before the domestic courts does not obviate or change the interpretation of the Optional Protocol.

That the authors' claims were joined with the claims of another set of individuals before the domestic courts did not obviate or change the interpretation of the Optional Protocol.

Third F4 report, paragraphs 42 43 Fourth F4 report, part one, paragraphs 43 44.

A preliminary examination of these claims also revealed that in some instances the Kuwaiti companies in question had filed separate claims with the Commission, which were being processed as E4 claims. However, there were a number of instances where the Kuwaiti company had not filed a separate claim with the Commission.

Based on the above corrections, the revised category C claim total recommended awards by instalment are as follows

Recommended corrected total awards for category C claims

Based on the above corrections, the revised category D claim total recommended awards by instalment are as follows

TECHNICAL ANNEXES TO THE FIFTH F4 INSTALMENT REPORT

Third F4 report, paragraph 32.

Third F4 report, paragraph 47.

Fourth F4 report, part one, paragraph 50.

See third F4 report, paragraph 25.

Third F4 report, paragraph 33.

Third F4 report, paragraph 34.

Third F4 report, paragraph 35.

Second F4 report, paragraph 22.

First F4 report, paragraph 32.

First F4 report, paragraph 63.

Second F4 report, paragraph 79.

Fourth F4 instalment, claim No. 5000457.

Fourth F4 instalment, claim No. 5000153.

There are four claims for C7 Real Property in the fourth instalment.

Claims with both category C and category D losses

Based on the above corrections, the revised category D claim total recommended awards by instalment are as follows Recommended corrected total awards for category D claims

There were two cases of falsification of medical insurance claims by staff members.

In particular, the Panel referred to the Report and recommendations made by the Panel of Commissioners concerning the first instalment of F3' claims (S AC.26 1999 24) (the First F3' Report ) and the Part Three, Third F3 Report.

Based on its review of the documents submitted, including documents and clarifications received in response to procedural orders, the Panel concluded that the issues presented by the claims in this instalment had been adequately developed and that oral proceedings were not required.