equity, the amount of compensation corresponding to consequential damages and loss of earnings, in exercise of its broad powers in this regard.” 135. The representatives asked the Court to order the State to pay the sum of US$439,565.34 (four hundred and thirty-nine thousand five hundred and sixty-five United States dollars and thirty-four cents) to Mr. Fleury and US$7,580.20 (seven thousand five hundred and eighty United States dollars and twenty cents) to his wife. The details of these amounts are as follows: (a) reimbursement of a loan that Mr. Fleury acquired with the Episcopal Commission for Justice and Peace between June 2002 and September 2003 for a total of US$7,580.20 (seven thousand five hundred eighty United States dollars and twenty cents); (b) loss of earnings over the period when he was recovering from the injuries suffered as a result of the torture and ill-treatment during 2002, for a sum equivalent to US$1,709.34 (one thousand seven hundred and nine United States dollars and thirty-four cents); (c) owing to his inability to resume his work as a consultant with the law firm of Roudy, Aly, Woodson Bertrand, Mr. Fleury accumulated 64 months of loss of earnings, corresponding to US$51,243.73 (fifty-one thousand two hundred and forty-three United States dollars and seventy-three cents); (d) US$2,057.50 (two thousand and fifty-seven United States dollars and fifty cents) for travel expenses for Mr. Fleury and his family when he had to go into exile in the United States; (e) US$1,200.00 (one thousand two hundred United States dollars) for phone calls to his family when they were still in Haiti while Mr. Fleury was living in the United States; (f) US$774.00 (seven hundred seventy-four United States dollars) for the cost of remittances made by Mr. Fleury to his family when he was in the United States and they were in Haiti; (g) US$375,000.00 (three hundred and seventyfive thousand United States dollars) corresponding to the value of the house in a residential area of Port-au-Prince that he had to abandon, and (h) US$5,737.45 (five thousand seven hundred and thirty-seven United States dollars and forty five cents) owing to the loss of earnings of Mrs. Benoit Fleury when she was forced to leave her job as owner of a boutique and as a seamstress. b) Considerations of the Court 136. The Court observes that, from the information submitted by the parties, the following items can be distinguished regarding the victim’s loss of earnings: (a) loss of income from Mr. Fleury’s activities with the Episcopal Commission for Justice and Peace,114 and (b) loss of earnings from Mr. Fleury’s activity with the law firm of Roudy, Aly, Woodson Bertrand.115 The Court has verified that documentary evidence of Mr. Fleury’s earnings was only provided with regard to the former. The representatives provided statements to prove the other earnings. 137. Regarding consequential damages, the Court indicates that the information provided by the parties allows the following items to be inferred: (a) the debt that Mr. Fleury acquired with the organization from June 2002 to September 2003, for loans made while he was in hiding and did not exercise his professional activities;116 (b) travel expenses for Mr. Fleury and his family because they had to go into exile in the United States;117 (c) expenses 114 US$1,709.34 (one thousand seven hundred and nine United States dollars and thirty-four cents) 115 US$51,243.73 (fifty one thousand two hundred and forty-three United States dollars and seventy-three cents) 116 US$7,580.20 (seven thousand five hundred and eighty United States dollars and twenty cents) 117 US$ 2,057.50 (two thousand and fifty-seven United States dollars and fifty cents) 36