95. The parties agreed on a payment plan on June 15, 1999, by which the municipality committed to pay a percentage of the total debt in installments and to sue the national treasury for funds to pay the rest of the amount owed. Point three of the agreement stipulated, “the municipality recognizes the right of the claimants as held in the final verdict in this case, and both parties commit to take measures with the central government to process payment of the balance due.”223 An updated assessment of the settlement amount was submitted on October 20, 1999, for a total of CLP 1,131,662,347.224 96. The plaintiffs asked the court on August 29, 2006, to order the municipality to submit a report on measures undertaken with the central government to obtain the funds for payment of the debt and a progress report on the status of the lawsuit against the national treasury of Chile,225 and resubmitted this request on December 29, 2006.226 The plaintiffs asked the court on March 27, 2007, to nullify the payment plan due to non-compliance by the municipality.227 97. The municipality of Parral informed the court on November 9, 2007, that it had completed the tenth and final installment called for in the payment plan agreement.228 That same day, the plaintiffs filed a brief claiming that the municipality had failed to comply with clause eight of the payment plan agreement, in which it was required to divest itself of the municipal theater within three years, and therefore requested that the payment agreement by nullified.229 They resubmitted this petition on March 7, 2008.230 The court of Parral issued an order on March 31, 2008, denying the request to nullify the payment agreement and held that the matter should be taken to the court of appeals.231 The plaintiffs lodged an appeal on April 5, 2008.232 The court of appeals decided that the court of first instance should examine the request to nullify the payment agreement.233 The court of first instance issued an order on January 13, 2009, denying the request to nullify the payment agreement, holding that the municipality had complied with it.234 223 Payment plan agreed to between [Alexandra] Orrego Da Silva and Antonio César Valero Nader for the plaintiffs and the mayor of Parral (evidence file, folio 17202). 224 Cf. Assessment submitted by Public Accountant Jorge Leoncio Leal Cruces to the Court of First Instance of Parral, October 20, 1999 (evidence file, folios 17208 to 17212). 225 Cf. Brief filed by Paulo Ávila Hernández on behalf of the plaintiffs before the Court of First Instance of Parral, August 29, 2006 (evidence file, folio 17222). 226 Cf. Brief filed by José Seda Navarrete on behalf of the plaintiffs before the Court of First Instance of Parral, December 29, 2006 (evidence file, folio 17224). 227 Cf. Brief filed by José Seda Navarrete on behalf of the plaintiffs before the Court of First Instance of Parral, March 27, 2007 (evidence file, folios 17225 and 17226). 228 Cf. Brief filed by Paulo Javier Ávila Hernández on behalf of the municipality of Parral before the Court of First Instance of Parral, November 9, 2007 (evidence file, folio 17233 and 17234). 229 Cf. Brief filed by Sonia Benavente Nader on behalf of the plaintiffs before the Court of First Instance of Parral, November 9, 2007 (evidence file, folios 17235 and 17236). 230 Cf. Brief filed by Sonia Benavente Nader on behalf of the plaintiffs before the Court of First Instance of Parral, March 7, 2008 (evidence file, folio 17251). 231 Cf. Order by the Court of First Instance of Parral, March 31, 2008 (evidence file, folio 17252). 232 Cf. Motion of appeal lodged by Sonia Benavente Nader on behalf of the plaintiffs before the Talca Court of Appeals, April 5, 2008 (evidence file, folios 17253 and 17254). 233 Cf. Order by the Talca Court of Appeals, June 4, 2008 (evidence file, folio 17257). 234 Cf. Order by the Court of First Instance of Parral, January 13, 2009 (evidence file, folios 17266 and 17267). 34