More than 900,000 category A compensation claims were submitted by claimants.

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

No compensation has been recommended for C7 Real Property losses where claimants fail to establish the fact of ownership.

5. Decides not to award compensation to the claimants referred to in paragraph 63(b) of the final report,

As such, a date of loss of 2 August 1990 for such losses would result in over compensation for claimants.

Both Hungarian Claimants and Nigeria seek compensation for the cost of repairing physical damage to their embassy buildings in Kuwait City.

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

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.

In providing a fixed amount of compensation in the decision the Working Group notes that this amount may not necessarily provide the same compensation that the bedoun claimants could have received under the regular claims programme.

Neither unidentified claimants who obtained compensation for lost securities nor claimants who obtained restitution for the confiscation of Jewish property could be deemed suitable groups of comparison, in the absence of any indication of the criteria on which the differential treatment was allegedly based, and since Jewish compensation claims for war induced losses concerned an entirely different situation subject to distinct legislation.

Duty of Claimants to prevent and mitigate environmental damage Iraq contends that some of the damage for which Claimants seek compensation in the fifth F4 instalment has been caused or contributed to by the Claimants themselves, either because they failed to take steps to mitigate damage resulting from the invasion and occupation of Kuwait or because the damage was aggravated by the acts or omissions of the Claimants after the invasion and occupation.

The compensation did not take into account the broad impairments of reduced quality of life or the increased risks that Iraq imposed on the entire populations of the Claimants.

However, the amount of compensation for successful claimants in categories A and B was fixed by the Governing Council at a relatively low level, while the electronic compensation formulae developed by the category C Panel of Commissioners took into account the possibility of fraud and resulted in the Panel recommending modest amounts of compensation.

Parallel or concurrent causes of damage Iraq contends that some of the damage for which the Claimants seek compensation cannot be attributed solely to Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait.

The rejection of the compensation claim, under article 155 of the Political Constitution, which provides that compensation may not be claimed from the State for damage or injury caused by armed movements or civil disturbances, was appealed and resolved in favour of the claimants.

We have by today resolved most of the 2.6 million claims filed, and we have awarded over 5 billion in compensation to successful claimants from practically all of the claiming countries.

At its June 2005 session, the Governing Council established a final deadline of 30 September 2006 for submitting Governments with currently unlocated claimants to locate such claimants and to inform the secretariat of any claimant who was located so that the claimant could receive payment of his or her compensation award.

The Commission approved compensation on the basis of personal statements from claimants so long as the route and circumstances of departure fit the general departure pattern of nationals from the same country.

For example, in UNCC claim Nos. 3013925, 3012838 and 3012847 the claimants seek compensation of USD 3,360,294, USD 3,891,003 and USD 6,221,107, respectively, for losses relating to three separate businesses.

The amount claimed column shows the compensation sought by the Claimants (with amendments, where applicable) expressed in United States dollars (USD) and corrected, where necessary, for computational errors.

No compensation has been recommended for the five C4 CPHO claims on account of irregularities in supporting documents and for C4 MV losses where claimants did not prove ownership of their motor vehicles.

If compensation were to be approved for an amount in excess of that for which payment orders have been provided by Egypt, effecting payment of the compensation to the claimants would require the names of the claimants and the respective amounts approved, which have not been provided by Egypt.Further, the Panel notes that the consolidated claim filed by Egypt concerned deposits, the existence of which Egypt was aware of at the time of filing the claim.

The Claimants further argue that, under general international law, it would be an absurd and unreasonable result to deny compensation for temporary loss of resources resulting from a deliberate internationally wrongful act of aggression.

However, Governments are reminded that they must observe the requirements of Decision 13 (S AC.26 1992 13, dated 25 September 1992) to avoid multiple recovery of compensation by claimants for the same loss.

The Commission responded that financial rule 106.5 was intended to apply to commercial rather than successful compensation claimants and that according to the unanimous view of the 17 Panels of Commissioners (51 Commissioners) who considered the issue, claimants should be restored to their pre loss position and that therefore the date of loss was the relevant date.

Specific responsibilities borne by Governments include informing claimants of the criteria for compensation submitting claims to the Compensation Commission on behalf of their nationals affirming that there is no reason to believe that information stated in claim forms is incorrect distributing payments and providing reports to the Commission on the amounts of payments.

Thus, the Panel recommends that compensation in the amount of US 58,709 be awarded for the 175 claimants in this grouping which corresponds to the total of the amounts as listed in the respective payment orders.

The authorities in their replies refer to the legislation in force and argue that the provisions of the law, limiting restitution and compensation to Czech citizens are necessary and apply uniformly to all potential claimants.

In those cases, the E4 Panel recommended no compensation for the claims when they were reviewed, as the E4 claimants had not submitted sufficient information or documents to support their asserted losses.

Claimants listed in the Executive Committee database Claimants provisionally eligible according to the Executive Committee database

At the request of the secretariat, the Palestinian Authority withheld payment of the remainder of the amount prior to its distribution to the claimants and the Palestinian Authority is in the process of returning it to the Compensation Fund.

In the preliminary review of the Claims, it was noted that several of the Claimants were seeking compensation for payments made to employees or other persons for the loss of tangible property or the loss of income or support.

However, two of these claimants filed duplicative claims in the bedoun programme, reducing the number of claims filed by such claimants to 957.

However, 14 of these claimants filed duplicative claims in the bedoun programme, reducing the number of claims filed by such claimants to 29,051.

However, 11 of these claimants filed duplicative claims in the bedoun programme, reducing the number of claims filed by such claimants to 387.

However, 10 of these claimants filed duplicative claims in the bedoun programme, reducing the number of claims filed by such claimants to 1,436.

As non Palestinian claimants are not eligible to participate in this late claims programme, the Panel was concerned that business owners who failed to file in the regular claims programme may have provided fabricated ownership documents establishing rent a permit agreements with Palestinian claimants with the understanding that the parties would share in any award of compensation.

However, as a result of a clerical oversight, the secretariat failed to record the Panel's findings concerning irregularities in some of the documents submitted by the claimants in support of particular losses for which the Panel recommended no compensation.

With respect to the claims for which the Panel recommends no award of compensation, the Panel notes that most of these claimants did not submit the requisite medical reports or death certificates to prove the fact of injury or death.

This is relevant to the issue of streaming of claimants.

The Claimants, therefore, maintain that they are entitled to recover compensation for ongoing losses of natural resources resulting from Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait, and that such compensation should be measured from the time that the resources were damaged up to the time when recovery to pre invasion conditions has been or will be completed.

The Committee observes that the confiscations themselves are not here at issue but rather the denial of restitution to the author and his brothers, whereas other claimants under the Act have recovered their properties or received compensation therefor.

Claimants not listed in either database

Claimants listed in the PACI database

Claimants not listed in either database