Bass Berry & Sims – The Second Circuit joined the Third, Fifth, Tenth, and D.C. Circuits to hold that “the mere fact of a violation” that could give rise to a civil penalty at the government’s discretion does not create an obligation under the FCA’s reverse false claim provision. Instead, “a duty to pay is ‘established’ only when it triggers an immediate and self-executing duty to pay.”
Regulations, Compliance, & Enforcement
Trending Now
Proposed Updates to DFARS Regarding Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence • Slotting vs. Conformance – The Door Into Summer • OMB Plans to Make IT Contract Data Collection Public • Semiconductor Manufacturing Equipment: BIS’s Shift to More Aggressive Enforcement • Navigating Self-Reporting Under the DOJ’s New Corporate Enforcement Policy
Second Circuit Addresses “Obligation” Requirement of False Claims Act’s Reverse False Claim Provision
pathdoc | Shutterstock
Track False Claims Act cases, audit trends, and compliance best practices with our Compliance & Enforcement newsletter, delivering up-to-the-minute intelligence Monday–Saturday — Subscribe here.