Of the 4 claims, three claims have been satisfied, while in one case court proceedings have been closed.

The evidence in the claim file includes payroll records and employment contracts, termination notices prepared by the claimant's personnel division, letters from the claimant to its bank requesting payment of the claimed amounts to the relevant employees and, in a number of cases, bank debit advices indicating that payment was made in accordance with the claimant's instructions.

The respondent set off against this claim a damage claim for lost profit owing to the termination of the business relation with the claimant and refused to pay.

Furthermore, claimants who filed more than one eligible claim within the bedoun programme will receive compensation only with respect to one of those claims.

In some instances, the Panel examined one E4 claim in relation to more than one individual claim.

The Panel notes that the claim for cancelled Kuwaiti dinars is significantly larger than similar claims the regular category D claims programme.

In other instances, the Panel examined an individual claim in relation to more than one E4 claim.

With respect to the stand alone claims in this instalment, there is one occasion where more than one claim has been filed for the losses of the same company by the same individual claimant.

Iran, therefore, could have included these claim units in the submissions that it filed within these deadlines.

At times the claim preparers appeared to be more familiar with the claims than the claimants.

In the view of the Panel, this should involve the services of a qualified senior epidemiologist.

The Governing Council also considered a number of claims in categories B, C and E that were submitted after the relevant filing deadlines.

Of these claims, the Panel recommends awards of compensation for two claims, while no awards are recommended for the remaining 16 claims.

One claim in the sixth instalment was found to be a duplicate of a claim awarded compensation in the fifth instalment.

A total of 37 confirmed matches were identified, which related either to claims filed by the same claimant within the bedoun programme or to claims filed by the same claimant in different claim categories.

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.

Third F4 instalment, claim No. 5000450 and fourth F4 instalment, claim Nos. 5000454 and 5000466.

For example, in UNCC claim No. 3012259 the claimant seeks compensation of USD 4,930,795 for business losses.

The fourthsecond group of overlapping claims initially consisted of E4 claims related to 39seven category C claims and 24 category C and D claims.

These claims lack either the claimant's signature or evidence of authority to act on the part of the individual who filed the claim on behalf of the claimant.

Such notes, according to the Claimant, ultimately ended up in the hands of the Sri Lankan refugees.

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

The Commission therefore had to rely on national Governments to prevent the submission of such multiple claims.

First F4 instalment, claim No. 5000405.

In twofive of the individual claims identified as potentially overlapping with E4 claims, the Panel considers that the claim wass were not overlapping as the individual claimant was weres claiming losses that were related to the E4 claimant companies but were not overlapping losses (for example, where the individual claimant is seeking compensation for a loss of salary or management fee from the E4 claimant).

The average amount claimed for the claims in this instalment is about USD 2 million, compared to about USD 820,000 for all claims, about USD 934,000 for Jordanian claims and about USD 861,000 for Kuwaiti claims in the regular category D claims programme.

The median amount claimed is about USD 470,000 for claims in this instalment, compared with about USD 263,000 for all claims, about USD 335,000 for Jordanian claims and about USD 276,000 for Kuwaiti claims in the regular category D claims programme Approximately 75 per cent of the claims in this instalment contain D8 D9 business losses in relation to unincorporated establishments in Kuwait.

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.

duplicate claims Two or more claims filed by a claimant under the late claims programme in the same category.

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

JordanTwo claims reported in the second instalment were found to be duplicates of claims also reported in the same instalment.

For example, in the claim of Gharnata Cinema Production Co., the individual claimant had provided audited financial statements for the years ended 1987, 1988 and 1989.

To date, approximately 20 billion has been made available to Governments and international organizations for distribution to successful claimants in all categories of claims.

The majority of the claims in the fourthsecond group of overlapping claims were filed by an E4 claimant and an individual claimant who was a shareholder of the E4 claimant company.

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.

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 total amount asserted for claims preparation costs is USD 76,339.12.

The E4 claimant Al Nuwaisib Building Requirement was originally considered in the eighteenth instalment of E4 claims where it had been considered as overlapping with a category C claim filed by a different individual claimant.

As stated above, the eligible category D Palestinian late claims have a higher incidence of loss types and higher amounts claimed than claims in the regular category D claims programme, giving rise to a potential risk of overstatement of the claims.

Some claims in the fourth instalment lacked either (a) the claimant's signature affirming the information provided in the claim and the losses being claimed, or (b) evidence of authority on the part of the individual who filed the claim on behalf of the claimant.

Sixth F1 instalment, claim No. 5000120.

First F4 instalment, claim No. 5000393.

First F4 instalment, claim No. 5000392.

First F4 instalment, claim No. 5000397.

First F4 instalment, claim No. 5000404.