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
AI and ICT Compliance, Rare Earth Supply Chains, Small Business Fraud, Cyber Enforcement • Contractor Settles False Claim Allegations Over Cybersecurity Violations • Amid Rising Interest in Defense, IPOs Are an Increasingly Viable Exit Route for Investors • Just Having a ‘Human in the Loop’ Is Not AI Governance • Space Force Acquisition Nominee Faces Ethics Scrutiny over Defense Industry Ties
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.