What is the False Claims Act and how does it relate to Qui Tam?

The False Claims Act (FCA) is a federal law that imposes penalties for submitting false claims to the government. Qui Tam provisions allow private individuals, known as relators, to sue on behalf of the government those who defraud it, potentially earning a portion of any recovery.

Can I be held liable if someone else files a qui tam lawsuit against my company?

If you are an individual accused in a qui tam action, liability depends on your role and involvement in the alleged fraudulent activities. Defendants can face severe penalties including fines and imprisonment if found guilty under the FCA.

What defenses are available to someone facing Qui Tam charges?

Defenses include proving that no false claim was made, demonstrating lack of intent or knowledge regarding the alleged fraud, or showing compliance with applicable laws and regulations at all times relevant.

Qui Tam & False Claims Act Defense

DOJ Intervention in Qui Tam Cases: A Critical Analysis

The Department of Justice (DOJ) plays a pivotal role in qui tam actions under the False Claims Act (FCA), which is codified at 31 U.S.C. § 3729-3733. When I served as a federal prosecutor, DOJ intervention was often seen as the catalyst that could elevate a case from local to national significance. A qui tam whistleblower files an action on behalf of the government and the FCA allows for substantial rewards if successful. The decision by the DOJ whether or not to intervene in a qui tam suit is critical, given the leverage it brings in terms of resources and credibility. In my experience, once the complaint is filed under seal, the DOJ has 60 days to decide whether to take over the case, though this period can be extended. The decision is informed by various factors including the strength of evidence, potential for recovery, and the impact on broader enforcement priorities. A thorough review of all relevant documentation, interviews with involved parties, and analysis of legal precedents are typically conducted before a determination is made. When the DOJ decides not to intervene in a case, it does not necessarily mean that the qui tam plaintiff cannot continue alone under the FCA's "private attorney general" provisions. However, securing success without intervention can be more challenging due to resource limitations and the reduced pressure on defendants from a federal agency backing the claim.

Statutory Framework

The False Claims Act, at 31 U.S.C. § 3729-3733, provides the statutory framework for qui tam actions.

DOJ Intervention

The DOJ's decision to intervene significantly influences case outcomes and resource allocation.

Non-intervention OutcomesWhistleblowers can still pursue cases without DOJ intervention, though it presents greater challenges.

Former Federal Prosecutor Insight

In my time as a federal prosecutor, I observed that the DOJ's decision to intervene in qui tam cases often hinges on whether there is sufficient evidence of fraud and if the case aligns with broader enforcement goals. The intervention process can be lengthy but ultimately serves to strengthen the government’s stance against false claims.