it considered that the action had prescribed. 106 The judge pointed out that the facts occurred on August 15, 1974, so that far more time had elapsed than the four-year statute of limitations established in Article 2332 of the Civil Code.107 On June 12, 2003, the CAS declared the appeal against that ruling void. 108 H. Treasury Situation of the Magdalena Navarrete family group and their case against the Chilean 87. According to the report of the Rettig Commission, on November 16, 1974, Sergio Reyes, an active member of the Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria (MIR), was arrested at his home by DINA agents.109 From that moment on, the detainee disappeared, without there being any certain evidence of his having been held at detention centers.110 The Retting Commission reached the conviction that the victim was disappeared by State agents in violation of his human rights.111 88. Under Law 19.123 of 1992, Magdalena Navarrete, the victim's mother, received a compensation award and has received a monthly pension in the amount of 360,674 Chilean pesos since July 1, 1991.112 Likewise, María Elisa Zepeda Rojas, the victim's wife, received a compensation award and has received a monthly pension in the amount 40 percent of 504,945 Chilean pesos since July 1, 1991. The victim's son received both a compensation award and a pension. 113 The parties did not report whether Alberto, Patricio Hernán, and Víctor Eduardo Reyes Navarrete, brothers of the victim, received reparation benefits. 89. On July 28, 2000, the mother and Jorge Alberto, Víctor Eduardo, and Patricio Hernán Reyes Navarrete, brothers of the victim, filed a civil suit for moral prejudice caused by the arrest and disappearance of Sergio Reyes.114 On June 19, 2002, the 17th Civil Court declared it proven that he had been arrested and disappeared by State agents but that the statute of limitation has been running since 1074, exceeding the four years for prescription established in Article 2332 of the Civil Code. 115 That ruling was appealed116 and the appeal declared void by the CAS. The "Let Judgment be Executed” (“cúmplase”) resolution was issued on June 26, 2003.117 106 Judgment of the 17th Civil Court, Espejo Gómez against the Chilean Treasury, Case Record No. C-2918-2000. Attached to the petition of October 16, 2003. 107 Judgment of the 17th Civil Court, Espejo Gómez against the Chilean Treasury, Case Record No. C-2918-2000, Seventh Whereas Clause. Attached to the petition of October 16, 2003. 108 Case Record No. 2918-200, p.185. Attached to the petition of October 16, 2003. 109 Report of the Rettig Commission, Volume II, p. 790. At: http://www.ddhh.gov.cl/ddhh_rettig.html.English taken from: http://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/resources/collections/truth_commissions/Chile90-Report/Chile90-Report.pdf. 110 Report of the Rettig Commission, Volume II, p. 791. At: http://www.ddhh.gov.cl/ddhh_rettig.html.English taken from: http://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/resources/collections/truth_commissions/Chile90-Report/Chile90-Report.pdf. 111 Report of the Rettig Commission, Volume II, p. 791. At: http://www.ddhh.gov.cl/ddhh_rettig.html.English taken from: http://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/resources/collections/truth_commissions/Chile90-Report/Chile90-Report.pdf. 112 The State's brief of November 21, 2008, which was not contested by the petitioner. 113 The State's brief of November 21, 2008, which was not contested by the petitioner. 114 Action brought before the 17th Civil Court. Attached to the petition of January 22, 2004. 115 17th Civil Court, Navarrete against the Chilean Treasury, Judgment of June 19, 2002, Court Record Case Number: C-31182000. Attached to the petition of January 22, 2004. 116 Appeal of November 7, 2002. Attached to the petition of January 22, 2004. 117 Judicial Branch of the Republic of Chile. Inquiry into status of cases, breakdown of developments. 17