95 over after paying the rent for the house where she lived. When the family returned to France they had lost everything. They had to sell their property. Going back to France entailed difficulties finding a job and earning enough to cover living expenses. Daniel Tibi cannot work normally and Beatrice Baruet was unemployed for several months. In France they were able to survive thanks to the generosity of Mrs. Baruet’s parents. They ask the court to set reparations to family assets in fairness, and for these reparations to be paid to Mr. Tibi and Mrs. Baruet. Pleadings of the State 233. Ecuador argued that Mr. Tibi’s rights were not violated, and that therefore it is not in order to enter the reparations stage. Nevertheless, if the State is found responsible, it deems that the Court must: a) estimate what the victim’s average salary was, as it has done other times. It is ambiguous to state that it fluctuated between US$5,000.00 (five thousand United States dollars) and US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars) a month, on the one hand, and to state elsewhere that it was US$2,000.00 (two thousand United States dollars) a month; b) estimate to what extent Mr. Tibi and his next of kin were affected by the violations to establish the monetary compensation; and c) require the ownership documents of the goods seized from Mr. Tibi at the time of his detention, to establish exactly which belonged to him, in case the Court orders reparations regarding the right to property. Considerations of the Court 234. The Court will now establish the pecuniary damages, which involve loss of or detriment to the victim’s income and the expenses incurred by his next of kin due to the facts,170 and it will set a compensation that seeks to redress the property-related consequences of the violations. For this, it will take into account the evidence gathered in this case, the Court’s own jurisprudence, and the pleadings of the Commission, of the representatives of the victim and his next of kin and of the State. a) Loss of earnings 235. The Court deems it proven that Daniel Tibi was a merchant who traded in gems and art (supra para. 90(1)) and received fluctuating monthly income (supra para. 90(44)). 236. This Court notes that due to the type of activity that Daniel Tibi carried out, it is not possible to establish the income he received at the time of his detention exactly. In this regard, taking into account the type of activity that the victim carried out to earn his living as well as the specificities of the instant case, the Court sets in fairness €33,140.00 (thirty- three thousand one hundred and forty euros), 170 See Case of the Gómez Paquiyauri Brothers, supra note 8, para. 205; Case of the 19 Tradesmen, supra note 9, para. 236; and Case of Molina Theissen . Reparations, supra note 9, para. 55.