5 Nación S.A., compelling the State to reimburse “principal in the amount of sixty-three million eight hundred and eleven thousand colones, pursuant to the certificate of deposit […], plus statutory interest and default interest owed”; furthermore, the State was compelled to “pay personal and court costs incurred in pursuing this action”. Upon issuing such judgment, Costa Rica informed that, among other steps being taken, “funds [were] being applied into the 'compensation’ item to provide for […] the payment of the damages award against the State”, which implied “taking unavoidable legal steps which require from two to three months to be effective, when the deposit into La Nación S.A.'s account will be made". 11. That, finally, on January 29, 2009 the State reported that it had made two deposits into La Nación S.A.'s account for sixty-three million, eight hundred and eleven thousand colones (CRC 63,811,000.00) and sixty-seven million, seven hundred and fifty thousand, three hundred and sixty colones (CRC 67,750,360.00), as "the principal owed for the annulment of the aforementioned judgment and [the] amount [arising from] costs and statutory and default interest”. The State attached copies of the certificates of the deposits made on September 19 and December 10, 2008. 12. That the representatives pointed out that they had to file an action against the State in view of "the Ministry of Finance's refusal to comply with the judgment reimbursing the compensation award paid when required [...]. The Ministry alleged that such payment should be ordered by the Supreme Court of Justice en banc. The Supreme Court, for its part, failed to comply with the requirement and expressed its opinion that contentiousadministrative proceedings should be carried out previously, refusing to comply with the Inter-American Court's Judgment pursuant to the Convention and the Headquarters Agreement. Finally, the State as defendant in the aforementioned proceedings has not been particularly cooperative either, since, in light of its undeniable international obligations in this regard, in compliance with the Judgment it should have appeared at least upon commencement of the proceedings rather than confining itself to refrain from raising challenges. Had the State acted properly, the contentious-administrative proceedings would very likely have ended by now and the Judgment would have been enforced in whole”. 13. That the representatives added that the State “has failed to comply on its own with its duty to abide by a final international judgment almost five years old[, which] is even more inexplicable considering that section 27 of the Headquarters Agreement between [the State] and [the Court provides that] 'once the orders of the Court and its President have been notified to the appropriate administrative or judicial authorities of the Republic, they shall have the same binding force as the orders issued by Costa Rican courts’”. The representatives stated that the action filed by La Nación S.A. against the State was encouraged by them ”in an attempt to cure the State’s contradictions and breaches of duties and to offer the State further opportunity to comply with international duties which it has failed to perform on its own". This made the State’s breach of duties even worse, as “[the State] continues making excuses such as difficulties and defects in its domestic system for its delay in complying with a money judgment issued by a Costa Rican court along the same lines as [the Court’s order of] July 2004”. 14. That, with regard to the amounts deposited in late 2008 (supra Considering clause No. 11), the representatives stated that “they do not cover the interest accrued between the date of the Costa Rican court’s judgment and the payment date", which must be paid not only pursuant to the Costa Rican contentious-administrative court's judgment, but also