12 20) Given that the arguments submitted by Trinidad and Tobago in the Hilaire, Constantine et al. and Benjamin et al. Cases, with respect to the jurisdiction of this Tribunal to hear each case, were already resolved by the Court at the appropriate procedural stage 14 (infra para. 40), and that the facts alleged in the Applications submitted in the present Case pre-date the entry into force of the State’s denunciation (supra para. 13), and taking into account the considerations set out in the preceding paragraphs, the Court reaffirms that it is fully competent according to the terms of Articles 62(3) and 78(2) of the Convention, to hear the present Case and render judgment. III PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION 21) Between July 1997 and May 1999, the Commission received the 31 petitions that comprise the present Case from several British firms of Solicitors (supra para. 2). The Commission began to examine the facts set forth in the petitions on various dates between August 1997 and June 1999, and subsequently opened the cases and remitted the pertinent parts of the petitions to the State with a request for its observations. 22) The Commission received responses from the State in relation to certain cases 15 on various dates between December 1997 and September 1999. The responses, replies and rejoinders received were duly transmitted to the relevant parties. 23) On April 21, 1999, the Commission adopted Report No. 66/99 on the merits in the Hilaire Case, which it transmitted to the State on April 26, 1999. On May 18, 1999, the State sent the Commission its response to said Report, and on May 23, 1999, the Inter-American Commission, pursuant to Article 51 of the American Convention, decided to refer the case to the Court. 24) On November 19, 1999, the Commission adopted Report No. 128/99, in connection with the twenty-three cases that comprise the Constantine et al. Case. 16 14 Cf. I/A Court H.R., Hilaire Case. Preliminary Objections, supra note 10; I/A Court H.R., Benjamin et al. Case. Preliminary Objections, supra note 10; and I/A Court H.R., Constantine et al. Case. Preliminary Objections, supra note 10. 15 The cases in which the State provided a response are: 11,816 (Haniff Hilaire), 11,787 (George Constantine), 11,814 (Wenceslaus James), 11,840 (Denny Baptiste), 11,851 (Clarence Charles), 11,853 (Keiron Thomas), 11,855 (Anthony Garcia), 12,005 (Wilson Prince), 12,042 (Mervyn Edmund), 12,052 (Martin Reid), 12,072 (Rodney Davis), 12,073 (Gangadeen Tahaloo), 12,075 (Noel Seepersad), 12,082 (Alfred Frederick), 12,093 (Natasha De Leon), 12,111 (Vijay Mungroo), 12,112 (Phillip Chotalal), 12,129 (Naresh Boodram and Joey Ramiah), 12,137 (Nigel Mark), 12,140 (Wilberforce Bernard), 12,149 (Krishendath Seepersad), and 12,151 (Allan Phillip). The cases in which the State did not provide any response are: 12,021 (Darrin Roger Thomas), 12,043 (Samuel Winchester), 12,076 (Wayne Matthews), 12,141 (Steve Mungroo), 12,148 (Peter Benjamin), 12,152 (Narine Sooklal), 12,153 (Amir Mowlah), 12,156 (Mervyn Parris) and 12,157 (Francis Mansingh). 16 The twenty-three cases are the following: 11,787 (George Constantine), 11,814 (Wenceslaus James), 11,840 (Denny Baptiste), 11,851 (Clarence Charles), 11,853 (Keiron Thomas), 11,855 (Anthony Garcia), 12,005 (Wilson Prince), 12,021 (Darrin Roger Thomas), 12,042 (Mervyn Edmund), 12,043 (Samuel Winchester), 12,052 (Martin Reid), 12,072 (Rodney Davis), 12,073 (Gangadeen Tahaloo), 12,075 (Noel Seepersad), 12,076 (Wayne Matthews), 12,082 (Alfred Frederick), 12,093 (Natasha De Leon),