relation to the supporting facts. 49 In this regard, the Court has applied this principle since its first order and on several occasions50 to declare the infringement of rights that had not been directly alleged by the parties, but that were inferred from the analysis of the facts in dispute. Therefore, this principle authorizes the Court to assess the situation or legal matter in dispute in a manner different to that of the parties, provided that it is strictly based on the facts of the case. 51 56. In this case, the Court notes that the State had knowledge of the facts supporting the alleged violation of Article 5 of the Convention to the detriment of Sebastián Furlan and his family, given that Mr. Danilo Furlan, since his initial petition, referred to the alleged violations suffered both by his son and his family due to the alleged delay in the proceedings.52 Subsequently, and during the stage of admissibility before the Commission, Mr. Danilo Furlan indicated, on several occasions, the facts or violations that allegedly occurred, namely: i) “while the brain injury to [his] son, Sebastián, is serious, the collateral damage to the rest of the family, his mother, [two] brothers and [him] are equally serious [given that] [their] life gets increasingly complicated, with many psychological, emotional and economic problems, this family is like a sinking ship”;53 ii) “now they a[re] all separated from each other, each with his own psychological trauma”; 54 iii) Sebastián “has a life full of limitations, full of problems and uncertainties, as well as [him] and his brothers”; 55 and iv) “this should be considered a crime, since it will definitely leave irreparable impacts for the rest of their lives, for Sebastián as well as for each of his brothers and parents, who are also victims in this disintegrated, humiliated and impoverished family.” 56 The Court confirms 49 Cf. Caso Velásquez Rodríguez, para. 163 and Case of Vélez Loor v. Panama, para. 184. 50 By way of example, in the following cases, inter alia, the infringement of rights not invoked by the parties were declared, in application of the iura novit curia principle: i) in the case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras the violation of Article 1(1) of the Convention was declared; ii) in the case of Usón Ramírez v. Venezuela the violation of Article 9 of the American Convention was declared; iii) in the case of Bayarri v. Argentina the violation of Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture were declared: iv) in the case of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panama the infringement of Article I of the Convention on Forced Disappearance was declared, in relation to Article II of said instrument; v) in the case of Kimel v. Argentina the violation of Article 9 of the American Convention was declared; vi) in the case of Bueno Alves the infringement of Article 5(1) of the American Convention was declared to the detriment of the relatives of Mr. Bueno Alves; vii) in the case of the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia the violation of Article 11(2) of the Convention was declared; and viii) in the case of Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay the infringement of Article 3 of the American Convention was declared. 51 Cf. Case of Bueno Alves v. Argentina. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C No. 164, para. 70. 52 Specifically, in the initial petition he stated that “in these 13 years and as a result of th[e] accident […] many sad and painful [situations] happened in [his] family, everything fell apart, […] there was a divorce, because of the tension, desperation and anguish which caused real chaos in the marriage, a daughter left the house, fights took place [because of which] (the whole family) we[nt] to a psychiatric center.” Brief of July 18, 2001 (file of appendices to the Report on Merits, volume IV, page 1978). 53 Brief submitted by Danilo Furlan on January 4, 2002 (file of appendices to the report on merits, volume IV, page 1925). 54 Brief submitted by Danilo Furlan on January 4, 2002, page 1925. 55 Brief submitted by Danilo Furlan on July 24, 2002 (file of appendices to the Report on Merits, volume IV, page 1900). 56 Brief submitted by Danilo Furlan on October 28, 2002 (file of appendices to the Report on Merits, volume IV, page 1851). 18