89 293. Based on the compensation ordered by the Court in other cases, and considering the circumstances of the present case, the nature and severity of the violations committed, the sufferings caused to the victims and the way they have been treated, the time that has elapsed since the rape, the denial of justice, and also the alterations in their living conditions and other consequences of a nonpecuniary nature that they suffered, the Court finds it pertinent to establish, in equity and accordingly to the different intensity of the damages, the sum of US$ 50.000,00 (fifty thousand dollars of the United States of America) in favor of Mrs. Fernández Ortega, as compensation for non-pecuniary damage (supra paras. 131, 138, 159, 177, 183, 198, and 201). In addition, for the same concept, the Court establishes, in equity, compensation of US $10,000.00 (ten thousand dollars of the United States of America) in favor of each one of the eldest daughters, Noemí Prisciliano Fernández and Ana Luz Prisciliano Fernández (supra paras. 149 and 159), and US $5,000.00 (five thousand dollars of the United States of America) in favor of each of the following people: Colosio Prisciliano Fernández, Nélida Prisciliano Fernández (supra paras. 149 and 159) and Neftalí Prisciliano Fernández (supra para 149). Lastly, the Court will fix compensation in equity at US $2,500.00 (two thousand, five hundred dollars of the United States of America) in favor of Mr. Prisciliano Sierra (supra paras. 149 and 159). iii) Costs and expenses 294. As the Court has indicated on previous occasions, costs and expenses are included within the concept of reparation embodied in Article 63(1) of the American Convention.269 295. The Inter-American Commission asked that the Court “order the State […] to pay the reasonable and necessary costs and expenses arising from the processing of the present case that have been duly authenticated.” 296. In their final written brief of pleadings and motions, the representatives asked that the Court to order the State to pay the following amounts for costs and expenses: i) the sum that the Court establishes “in equity in favor of the victims […] for the expenditure incurred” in their seek for justice; ii) in favor of CEJIL, US$10,182.65 (ten thousand one hundred and eighty-two dollars of the United States of America and sixty-five cents) for the expenses incurred from June 2007 up until the presentation of the application and US$16,225.27 (sixteen thousand two hundred and twenty-five Dollars of the United States of America and twentyseven cents) for the expenses incurred following the presentation of the application, and iii) in favor of “Tlachinollan,” US$6,296.93 (six thousand two hundred and ninety-six Dollars of the United States of America and ninety-three cents) for the expenses incurred from March 2002 until the presentation of the application and US$17,847.38 (seventeen thousand eight hundred and forty-seven dollars of the United States of America and thirty-eight cents) for the expenses incurred following the presentation of the application. In addition, in their final written arguments, the representatives indicated that “Tlachinollan” had also disbursed the sum of US$1,843.61 (one thousand eight hundred and forty-three dollars of the United States of America and sixty-one cents), supposedly for expenses prior to the presentation of the application, which they alleged were not attached to their brief on pleadings and motions involuntarily, owed to “involuntary error.” Lastly, the representatives indicated that both CEJIL and “Tlachinollan” had incurred expenses for, inter alia, photocopies, stationery, and telephone calls for US$250.00 (two hundred and fifty dollars of the United States of America) each, 269 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria, supra note 204, para. 79; Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 18, para. 279, and Case of Manuel Cepeda Vargas, supra note 18, para. 254.