7 a) in a meeting summoned on December 28, 2005 the State made effective the payment of S/ 517,496.20 new soles with which it paid the totality of the compensatory amount set at S/ 839,496.22 new soles for each of the Senior Judges, without considering the interests, and b) they do not agree with Peru regarding the amount of legal interests generated due to delay in payment since their estimates do not coincide with those made by the Accounting Department of the Ministry of Justice. 21. The brief of January 18, 2006, through which Peru consulted the Court about the payment of the reparations and the date on which the interests for delayed payments should be computed, since the State considers that payments for the concept of compensation that it must pay the former Senior Judges generate interests as of the date on which the amount of said compensation was determined, that is, as of the Ruling of July 1, 2003, reason for which it proceeded to issue a check corresponding to the interests for delayed payments for the period that goes from July 2, 2003 through December 15, 2005. On the other hand, the beneficiaries stated that the Judgment of the Court includes the obligation to pay the reparations and, therefore, their payment should have been complied with six months after its issuing, thus the interests for delayed payments must be computed as of the expiration of said term. 22. The brief of January 19, 2006, received on the 25th of the same month and year, through which the Inter-American Commission referred to the consultation made by the State (supra Consideration 20), and declared that the interests for delayed payments must be computed as of the expiration of the 6 months as of the notification of the Judgment of the Court of January 31, 2001. 23. The brief of January 10, 2006, received on the 26th of the same month and year, through which Mrs. Delia Revoredo Marsano de Mur stated that on December 31, 2005 she had received from the State the amount of S/ 517,496.20 new soles, which she first applied to the payment of the interests due and then to the capital pursuant to Article 1257 of the Peruvian Civil Code, which grants the creditor the right to apply partial payment to the interests, and due to the disagreement with the State in this sense. Likewise, she considers that the amount for interests for delayed payments amounts to S/152,523.84 new soles, equal to US$ 44.859,95, since they must be computed from August 1, 2001 up to September 25, 2005. However, the State plans on acknowledging legal interests only for the amount of S/ 44,000.90 new soles, based on their calculation as of the moment in which the Peruvian court communicated to the Ministry of Justice that it should pay the senior judges the arrears of salary and other compensations in the year 2003. 24. The brief of January 19, 2006, received on the 26th of the same month and year, through which Mrs. Delia Revoredo Marsano de Mur informed that the previous week she had received the amount of S/ 45,749.06, equal to US$ 13,455.76, which she assigned to the amount of the interests due. 25. The brief of January 31, 2006, through which Mrs. Herlinda Ibáñez viuda de Aguirre Roca repeated her disagreement regarding the amount of the legal interests generated due to the delay in which the State has incurred, since it intended to consider that the delay period started in the year 2003 and not as of the peremptory time period stated in the Court’s judgment and, therefore, she had not accepted the