86 281. The State contested the claims of the representatives, arguing that they exceed the possibilities of a developing country such as Bolivia. Consequently, the State requested the Court, “based on equity criteria and on the conciliatory attitude” of the State to assess the actions taken as compensatory measures, which “offer the injured party a satisfaction that exceeds the financial sphere […].” 282. International case law has repeatedly established that the judgment can constitute per se a form of reparation.287 Nevertheless, considering the circumstances of the case sub judice, the sufferings that the perpetrated violations caused to the victims, as well as the change in the living conditions and the other consequences of an immaterial and nonpecuniary nature that the latter suffered, the Court finds it pertinent to establish an amount, in equity, as compensation for non-pecuniary damage.288 283. Considering the compensation ordered by the Court in other cases of enforced disappearances of persons, the circumstances of this case, the significance, nature and seriousness of the violations committed, which relate to the enforced disappearance of two members of the same family, the sufferings caused to the victims and the treatment they have received, the time that has elapsed since the disappearance commenced, the denial of justice, as well as the change in living conditions and other non-pecuniary consequences they suffered, the Court finds it pertinent to establish, in equity, the sum of US$80,000.00 (eighty thousand United States dollars) each for Messrs. Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and José Luis Ibsen Peña, as compensation for non-pecuniary damages. Also, for the same concept, the Court establishes, in equity, compensation of US$50,000.00 (fifty thousand United States dollars) for Martha Castro Mendoza, as well as compensation of US$40,000.00 (forty thousand United States dollars) each for Messrs. Rebeca Ibsen Castro, Tito Ibsen Castro and Raquel Ibsen Castro, because the damage to them arises from the violations committed against two members of the same family group. When establishing these sums, the Court is not considering the alleged threats against the Ibsen family, because these are not included in the factual framework of the instant case (supra para. 228). D.3 Costs and expenses 284. As the Court has indicated on previous occasions, costs and expenses are included in the concept of reparations embodied in Article 63(1) of the American Convention.289 285. The Commission requested the Court to order the State to pay the reasonable and necessary costs and expenses that are duly proved, already incurred, and to be incurred in the future, in processing this case in the domestic sphere and before Inter-American System of Human Rights. 287 Cf. Case of Neira-Alegría et al. v. Peru. Reparations and Costs. supra note 249, para. 56; Case of the “Las Dos Erres” Massacre v. Guatemala, supra note 7, para. 290, and Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra note 6, para. 275. 288 Cf. Case of Neira-Alegría et al. v. Peru. Reparations and Costs. supra note 249, para. 56; Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 8, para. 374, and Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra note 6, para. 275. 289 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39. para. 79; Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra note 6, para. 279, and Case of Manuel Cepeda Vargas v. Colombia, supra note 6, para. 254.