78 evidence and the arguments according to the rules of sound judicial discretion. Considerations of the Court 262. As the Court has indicated on previous occasions, costs and expenses are included in the concept of reparation established in Article 63(1) of the American Convention. 329 263. In the first place, with regard to the State’s request that the costs and expenses be in keeping with the amount established as precedent in the judgment delivered in the Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters, the Court reiterates that, pursuant to its case law, costs and expenses form part of the concept of reparation (supra para. 262), since the actions undertaken by the victims to obtain justice, at both the domestic and the international levels, involve expenditures that must be compensated when the State’s international responsibility is declared in a judgment. With regard to their reimbursement, it is the Court’s responsibility to prudently assess their scope, including the expenses incurred before the authorities of the domestic jurisdiction, as well as those arising during the course of the proceedings before this Court, bearing in mind the circumstances of the specific case and the nature of the international jurisdiction of protection of human rights. This assessment may be made based on the principle of equity and taking into account the expenses reported by the parties, provided that the quantum is reasonable. 264. The Court has indicated that “the claims of the victims or their representatives in relation to costs and expenses and the supporting evidence must be submitted to the Court at the first procedural opportunity, that is, in the pleadings and motions brief. Nevertheless, these claims may be updated subsequently, in line with the new costs and expenses incurred during the proceedings before this Court.”330 Furthermore, the Court reiterates that it is not sufficient to merely submit evidentiary documents; rather, the parties are required to present arguments relating the evidence to the fact that it is considered to represent and, in the case of alleged financial expenses, to establish clearly the items and the justification for them.331 265. As to the evidence regarding the financial expenditures made by the Search Association, the Court has confirmed that it incurred expenses during the litigation of the case at both the domestic and the international levels. Those expenses relate to transportation, accommodation, stationery, and messenger and communication services, among other items, for which the Association forwarded the relevant vouchers. In addition, some expenses incurred by the Search Association correspond to the search for the victims in this case. Finally, some expenses relate to workshops imparted by the Search Association to different individuals, including the victims in this case. 266. With regard to the State’s arguments concerning the receipts forwarded by the representatives, the Court observes that: a) some payment vouchers indicate an expenditure that has no clear or precise connection with this case; b) some vouchers refer to office supplies and the employee payroll without indicating the specific percentage that corresponds to the expenses in this case, and c) some payment vouchers are illegible and the sum they are intended to prove or the item of expenditure cannot be determined. The items to which they refer have been deducted, in fairness, from the calculation established by the Court. Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, para. 79, and Case of J v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 27, 2013. Series C No. 275, para. 418. 329 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 21, 2007. Series C No. 170, para. 275, and Case of the Landaeta Mejías Brothers et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 328. 330 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador, supra, para. 277, and Case of the Landaeta Mejías Brothers et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 328. 331