transfer of the deposits had occurred without the consent of the respective petitioners because: (i) the petitioners had never given their consent to the said operation; in other words, the consent of the respective petitioner was absent from the start of the operation, because he had given instructions to carry out another operation (for example, place the funds in a fixed-term deposit), which was verified in one case;149 (ii) the petitioner had not given his consent to the renewal of the respective placement in the Trade & Commerce Bank certificates of deposit, which was verified in 19 cases,150 or (iii) the withdrawal or early redemption of funds was not allowed, even though consent had been given under that condition, so it was considered that the Banco de Montevideo had unilaterally changed the conditions offered; this was verified in two cases.151 The absence of consent had to be verified prior to the date on which the Banco de Montevideo, was intervened; that is, before June 21, 2002152 (supra para. 68). 97. If the petitioner fulfilled the requirements established in article 31 of Law 17,613, he was considered to be a “depositor” and therefore his situation was equated to that of depositors with a checking, savings or fixed–term account in the Banco de Montevideo or La Caja Obrera. Hence, he had a right to a proportional share of the corresponding Recovery Fund, and was allocated the corresponding means to recover the proportional share; namely, credit certificates in the Nuevo Banco Comercial (created with the “healthy” assets of the Montevideo, Caja Obrera and Comercial Banks), cash or other assets collected by the Fund.153 Additionally, considering that they were in the same position as the above-mentioned depositors in the Banco de Montevideo and La Caja Obrera, those who fulfilled the requirements of the said article 31, had the right to receive a complement up to the first US$100,000.00 (one hundred thousand United 149 Cf. Elena Ibarra Acle and Victor Muccia García (File No. 2003/0521) (file of attachments to the application, volume III, attachment 12 (B), folios 3727 and 3728). 150 Cf. (1) Rolando Massoni, Martha Moreira and Sandra Massoni (File No. 2003/0228) (file of attachments to the application, volume XVI, attachment 12 (J), folios 11771 to 11774); (2) Kurt Bauer (File No. 2003/1329) (file of attachments to the application, volume XV, attachment 12 (I), folios 11150 to 11153); (3) Ernesto Llovet (File No. 2003/0952) (file of attachments to the application, volume XV, attachment 12 (I), folios 11350 to 11353); (4) Emilio Villamil Ramos and Elsa Marialli García (File No. 2003/0532) (file of attachments to the application, volume XV, attachment 12 (I), folios 11590 to 11593); (5) Carmen García Pardo (File No. 2003/0908) (file of attachments to the application, volume VII, attachment 12 (D), folios 6445 to 6451); (6) María del Carmen Bacigalupe and Julio Alberto Soler (File No. 2003/0221) (file of attachments to the application, volume III, attachment 12 (B), folios 3375 to 3436); (7) María Julia Boeri Bottero and María del Rosario Delmonte Boeri (File No. 2003/0708) (file of attachments to the application, volumes V and XIII, attachments 12 (C) and 12 (G), folios 4982 to 5070 and folios 9561 to 9640); (8) Graciela Cabrera D'Amico (File No. 2003/0880) (file of attachments to the application, volume X, attachment 12 (E), folios 8588 to 8663); (9) Gabriel Deus Rodríguez (File No. 2003/1045) (file of attachments to the application, volume VII, attachment 12 (D), folios 6215 and 6216); (10) Lucía Giambruno (File No. 2003/0327) (file of attachments to the State’s final written arguments, volume I, attachment 3, folios 30126 and 30127); (11) José Luis Martín Hernández (File No. 2003/0602) (file of attachments to the application, volume I, attachment 12, folios 2606 to 2619); (12) Rafael Outeiro Silvera and Jorge Peláez Pla (File No. 2003/1339) (file of attachments to the application, volume VIII, attachment 12, folios 6726 to 6729); (13) Álvaro Gerardo Pérez Asteggiante (File No. 2003/0438) (file of attachments to the application, volume XV, attachment 12 (I), folios 10970 to 11035); (14) Erasmo Salvador Petingi Nocella (File No. 2003/0610) (file of attachments to the application, volume II, attachment 12, folios 2637 to 2695); (15) Ximena Camaño Rolando and Ana Laura Camaño Rolando (File No. 2003/0650) (file of attachments to the application, volume I, attachment 12, folios 2315 to 2471); (16) Lucía Piñeyrúa Zeni (File No. 2003/0595) (file of attachments to the application, volume IX, attachment 12 (E), folios 7402 to 7405); (17) Lylianne Edith Urdaneta Magri (File No. 2003/0956) (file of attachments to the application, volume X, attachment 12 (E), folios 8441 to 8444); (18) Néstor Alberto Rosales and Viviana Rivanera de Rosales (File No. 2003/0493) (file of attachments to the application, volume XV, attachment 12 (I), folios 11049 to 11071), and (19) Marta Cázeres (File No. 2003/0598) (file of attachments to the application, volume IV, attachment 12 (B), folios 3774 to 3821). 151 Cf. (1) Clara Jasinski (File No. 2003/0637) (file of attachments to the application, volume III, attachment 12 (B), folios 3450 to 3490), and (2) Raúl Montero (File No. 2003/0469) (file of attachments to the application, volume XVI, attachment 12 (J), folios 11783 to 11786). 152 Cf. Affidavit of the witness Julio de Brun dated February 16, 2011 (merits file, volume III, folio 1105) and testimony of the witness Augusto Durán Martínez before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing in this case. 153 Cf. Affidavit of the witness Julio de Brun dated February 16, 2011 (merits file, volume III, folio 1105). 37