15 assessment in the year 1996, year in which it started the expropriation process within the domestic jurisdiction, for the amount of US$28.19 per m2,37 which represents a total of US$18,201,930.62. 47. On April 3, 2009, the Ninth Civil Judge issued a lower court judgment and based on the expert assessment of Manuel Silva Vásconez ordered the payment of the compensation in favor of the victim for the total amount of US$41,214,2333.12, and granted the Municipality the peremptory term of eight days to deposit the money in this judgeship. The parties contested said ruling. Mrs. María Salvador Chiriboga argued that the judgment did not consider the report presented by the expert Vicente Domínguez Zambrano, and that when deciding the value of the property as a just compensation, it did not consider the provision included in Article 244 of the Law of the Municipal Regimen, according to which it should acknowledge an additional five per cent as the expropriation price. On its part, the Municipality considered that “the judgment […] does not fall strictly on the legislation or the case’s factual grounds [since] the Judge in its ruling did not consider that the proceedings started in 1993, after the declaration of public interest for the creation of the Metropolitan Park,” and that the property is within an ecological protection area, declared as such in 1981 and named “Quito Plan” and the ordinance of 1990 that determined the boundaries of the Metropolitan Park. 48. Currently, the case is in consultation and appeals before the Provincial Court of Pichincha. b) Expert assessments offered during the processing before the Court 49. On October 1, 2007, Edmundo Gutiérrez del Castillo,38 proposed by the Commission and the representatives, offered his expert opinion before a public notary, and stated that the properties located In the occidental part of the Metropolitan Park, wherein the Salvador Chiriboga brothers are found, have the characteristics to estimate that their value is US$90 per m239 without being urbanized, which implies a total value of the property corresponding to US$58,111,875.00.40 forest in each area, evaluating each tree at $ 10, $ 20 or $ 40 pursuant to the estimated development of the stem. The expert estimated a total of 62,460 trees, which were assigned a value of U.S. $ 669,146. Cf. Expert assessment of Manuel Silva Vásconez, supra note 12, folios 653 and 654). 37 To which, he took the information of “classified ads” of the newspaper “El Comercio” in 1996 and conducted the assessment using the same methodology (with the difference that he applied $ 50 per m2 for infrastructure costs). It should be noted that the amounts in Sucres have been dollarized according to the current value of the dollar to date. For which the expert took data from the Central Bank Statistical Bulletin published on December 31, 1998. Expert cf. Vásconez assessment of Manuel Silva, supra note 12, folio 655. 38 Cf. Expert assessment of Edmundo Gutiérrez del Castillo rendered on October 1, 2007 (case file of Preliminary Objection and Merits, tome IV, folios 502 to 511), and Case of Salvador Chiriboga V. Ecuador, supra note 24, para. 19. e). Mr. Gutiérrez del Castillo is a technical expert of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and in the Mediation Centers of the Chamber of Commerce and of Construction. 39 To make an appraisal of the land in question, the expert took into account criteria such as: a) location (land is more valuable if it is far removed from possible natural disasters); b) the environment of the area (there is a higher cost of land when it is close to shopping centers, etc.) c) basic infrastructure services; d) community services (there is a higher value of land when it is close to green spaces, parks etc.) e) surface and shape of the lot; f ) similar plots for sale in the sector; g) demand in the area, h) marketability (also set by supply and demand), and i) zoning (the land where building construction permits height greater than 9 m are desirable). Cf. Expert assessment of Edmundo Gutiérrez del Castillo, supra note 38, folios 502 to 505. 40 The expert assessment does not state the specific date of the valuation. Cf. Expert assessment of Edmundo Gutiérrez del Castillo, supra note 38.