Accordingly, the WBC Claim as amended amounts to US 950,715,662.

Further, the Panel finds that to rely on the revised category D claim and its supporting evidence would be tantamount to allowing the individual claimant to file a new claim after the deadline for filing of claims.

FIRST INSTALMENT CORRECTIONS

SECOND INSTALMENT CORRECTIONS

Subsequent to the oral proceedings the Claimant amended the WBC Claim, which resulted in a reduction of the amount claimed by US 915,209.

The WBC Claim as amended by the Claimant can be analyzed as follows

(ii) Insurance Claims and Compensation Section

In its Third Report, the Panel outlined the modifications that it applies to the methodologies established by the category C Panel in the substantive processing of C3 Death losses.

22. Further, the Panel recommends approval of corrected recommended amounts for three claims from the second instalment.In December 1996, the Governing Council accepted the Panel s recommendation that pursuant to Decision 24, in the case of 42 confirmed matches of category A claims and category C1 quot departure claims from the second instalment, appropriate deductions be made from the compensation awarded to the category C claimants.

There are also three claimants in this instalment whose individual claims for C8 Business losses were determined to be claims for corporate losses.

Also included in this report is one E2 claim, that is a claim submitted by a non Kuwaiti corporation, public sector enterprise or other private legal entity (excluding oil sector, construction engineering, export guarantee insurance and environmental claimants) (the E2' claim ).

In its First Report, the Panel outlined the modifications that it applies to the methodologies established by the category C Panel in the substantive processing of C2 MPA losses.

The individual claimant whose claim had been identified as potentially overlapping with the E4 claim provided additional evidence and claimed for losses in addition to those losses claimed by the E4 claimant.

According to Jordan, this population increase resulted in environmental damage.

While the claimants in this instalment claimed for D2 and D3 losses more frequently than claimants in the regular category D claims programme and asserted higher claimed amounts, 103 of the 117 claims are not recommended for compensation as the claimants failed to prove the essential requirements of ownership, loss or causation.

Having concluded that this consolidated claim, in effect consists of 82 claims, comprising 67 managing agent and 15 insurance company claims,

The monitoring and assessment claims of Iran that were awarded funding in the first F4 instalment and are relevant to claim No. 5000287 are claim Nos. 5000392, 5000393 and 5000395.

The Panel has adopted the compensability criteria and valuation methodologies established by the category C Panel for this loss type in its Third Report and accordingly has individually reviewed the fourth instalment claims to determine their compensability.

68. A system of periodic claims audit should be introduced at the offices of the medical insurance companies to ensure that the claims submitted by them are correct.

In re examining these claims, the Panel notes the approach to the reconsideration of overlapping claims set out in paragraph 16 of the Special Overlap Report.

The Panel has adopted the methodologies established by the category C Panel for this loss type in its First Report.

The Panel further determines that those claimants who demonstrate that they made attempts to file in the West Bank but were unsuccessful due to the lack of claim forms have provided satisfactory reasons for late filing and are therefore eligible to participate in the late claims programme.

Upon receipt of a claim for real property, CRPC is responsible for determining who is the lawful owner and the value of the property.

Specifically, the secretariat, in valuing the claimant's D6 (loss of income) claim, incorrectly treated it as a duplicate of the claimant's C6 (salary loss) claim, resulting in an erroneous reduction of the amount of compensation awarded to the claimant for his C6 claim.

Before the smallclaim courts,

As decision 123 directed the Commission to process stand alone claims in E4 as Kuwaiti company claims, the stand alone claims in this instalment have been added to the centralized database maintained by the secretariat (the database ) and new E4 claim numbers have been assigned to each stand alone company claim.

Following the consolidation of the losses, the Panel applies to the consolidated claim the verification and valuation methodology that the E4 Panels developed for E4 claims, taking into consideration that the individual claimants may not be able to provide the same level of documentary evidence in support of the losses asserted as could be provided by the E4 claimants.

With regard to the compensability and the verification and valuation of these tangible property claims, the Panel has applied the approach set out in paragraphs 108 to 135 of the First E4 Report, but, where necessary, has modified this approach to take into consideration the particular circumstances of the stand alone claimants.

Of these, the total amount awarded for 334 claims was increased by USD 2,523,268.24 and the total amount awarded for three claims was decreased by USD 42,543.06.

Of these, the total amount awarded for one claim was increased by USD 682,000 and the total amount awarded for the other claim was decreased by USD 3,234,000.

For example, in UNCC claim No. 3012210 the claimant, who was 22 years old at the time of the invasion, asserted tangible property and profit losses totalling USD 5.6 million for his auto repair shop in Kuwait.

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.

The inability to obtain a claim form is a satisfactory explanation for failure to file a claim.

The Panel reviewed the overlapping claims together to determine which of the losses claimed by the category C claimant should be consolidated with the E4 claim for review.

Overall, there are 31,31,70 claims that the Panel has determined to be ineligible for inclusion in the late claims programme because the claimants failed to provide satisfactory reasons for late filing.

Where the third party was unable to verify the documents proffered by the claimant or provided statements inconsistent with the information provided by the claimant, the Panel finds the evidence submitted by the claimant to be unreliable.

The monitoring and assessment claims of Iran that were awarded funding in the first F4 instalment and are relevant to claim No. 5000301 are claim Nos. 5000329, 5000330, 5000346, 5000347, 5000348, 5000349, 5000350, 5000351 and 5000382.

Of these, the total amount awarded for two claims was increased by USD 8,000, while the total amount awarded for 54 claims was decreased by USD 114,000.

Amendment of claims Some Claimants proposed amendments to some of their claims in the fifth F4 instalment, which they stated were based on the results of monitoring and assessment activities.

If the Commission finds the claimant to be the lawful owner of the property, it may either order its return or just compensation, depending on the claimant apos s request.

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.

Consistent with its approach to other deficient claims described in the First Report, the Panel finds that these claims are materially deficient and therefore are not compensable.

In consequence, bedoun were unable to claim full compensation, available to other claimants.

First claim unit Medical treatment and public health facilities for refugees Iran seeks compensation in the amount of USD 5,639,273 for losses suffered as a result of the influx of refugees into its territory between 2 August 1990 and 2 March 1991.

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