On June 1, 2023, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled that whether an entity "knowingly" submitted a false claim to the government in violation of the Civil False Claims Act (FCA) depends on whether the defendant subjectively knew, or believed, its statements or representations to the government in connection with the claims for payment were truthful or accurate—not on what an objectively reasonable person may have known or believed.
The FCA imposes liability on anyone who "knowingly" submits a false claim for payment or approval to the government. To succeed on an FCA claim, the government or qui tam whistleblower plaintiff must show (1) that the claim was false and (2) that the defendant knew the claim was false.1 The knowledge element can be satisfied by establishing "actual knowledge" of falsity, "deliberate ignorance," or "reckless disregard" of the truth.2
In United States ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that the knowledge test will be assessed based on "what the defendant knew when presenting the claim," not "post hoc interpretations that might have rendered their claims accurate."3
This new ruling resolves confusion among various federal courts concerning how the knowledge test should be evaluated when reviewing potential FCA violations. Previously, five circuit courts had held that a company doing business with the government did not knowingly make a false claim if the company's statements, or representations, in question would have...
Pakistan on April 22, Thursday urged the United Nations to call upon India to restore full implementation of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), warning that New Delhi’s “illegal” decision to hold the ...