Go back to News
NEWS
Íñigo Erláiz new Managing Partner
31 January, 2022
The General Meeting of Partners of Gómez-Acebo & Pombo has approved this Monday, January 31, the appointment of Íñigo Erláiz as new Managing Partner.Íñigo Erláiz replaces Carlos Rueda, who will become Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Firm. The change at the head of the Firm’s management is part of an internal process resulting from the limitation of terms in the position of Managing Partner under the Firm’s bylaws.
The Meeting has also agreed to the renewal of the Board of Directors, which will be formed from now on by: Íñigo Erláiz, Miguel Lamo de Espinosa, Daniel Marín, Álvaro Mateo, Manuel Martín, Verónica Romaní, Mónica Weimann and Carlos Rueda as Chairman.
Íñigo Erláiz thanks the partners of the Firm for their support and trust and mentions his “enthusiasm to take on this project and contribute as much as possible, with the support of all the partners, to continue promoting the Firm as an Iberian firm of reference and thus continue with the upward trend of recent years”.
Experience
Íñigo Erláiz joined Gómez-Acebo & Pombo in 1999, where he has developed his entire professional career and where he has been a partner since 2010. He has headed the Corporate area since 2016, a period in which said practice has experienced remarkable growth, and is a specialist in M&A having regularly advised on mergers and acquisitions and private equity transactions. Íñigo Erláiz has been a member of the Firm’s Board of Directors for the last eight years.
He holds a degree in Law and a diploma in Corporate Legal Consultancy, with honors, from the Universidad Pontificia de Comillas (ICADE). He has a Master’s Degree in Human Resources Management from the UNED. He holds a diploma in Bankruptcy Law from the Madrid Bar Association.
Expansión
El Confidencial
El Economista
Cinco Días
Iberian Lawyer
Press contact
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
More information about
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
02 Jun, 2026 
Competition Blog
3 days ago
Overview of Civil Litigation in Portugal – GAR Know-How Guide
Administrative modernisation, major infraestructure projects, defence and energy transition in the new cycle of Portuguese public law.
3 days ago 
PUBLICATION
5 days ago
Partial limitation defences that may be raised in relation to the limitation period within a cartel (Supreme Court Judgment no. 681/2026 of 6 May)
A flawed judgment on a problem that has remained unresolved to date in the truck cartel. The issue is not whether the liability-in-solidum regime applies, but whether co-liable parties can raise personal defences.
5 days ago
PUBLICATION
5 days ago
The “serious risk” of financial assistance (Supreme Court (First Chamber) Judgment of 5 May 2026)
This paper critically analyses the Supreme Court ruling of 5May 2026, which applies the prohibition on financial assistance to a case involving the sale of treasury shares with deferred payment to the shareholders of the assisting company.
5 days ago
PUBLICATION
04 Jun, 2026
The Court of Justice of the European Union clarifies the impact on VAT of intra-group transfer pricing adjustments
The Court of Justice, in the Stellantis Portugal case, confirms that a transfer pricing adjustment intended to ensure a specific profit margin, even if certain repair or warranty costs are partially taken into account in its calculation, does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that there is an independent supply of services subject to value-added tax. The determining factors are the existence of a legal relationship involving reciprocal consideration and a direct link between the identifiable service and the consideration received.
04 Jun, 2026
PUBLICATION
04 Jun, 2026
Unanimous shareholders' agreements and dividends in specie
The Supreme Court and the Madrid Provincial Court, following established legal doctrine, have reiterated that a party to a unanimous shareholders’ agreement acts in bad faith if he or she challenges a company resolution passed in compliance with said shareholders’ agreement. In this case, the shareholders’ agreement provided for the possibility of paying dividends in kind, and the contested resolution — which was passed by a majority at the shareholders’ meeting — transferred certain real estate properties to one of the shareholders (with his consent) in payment of the dividend due to him.
04 Jun, 2026
PUBLICATION
01 Jun, 2026
NGT plant patenting: betwixt and between regulatory continuity and expectations
The evolution of the concept of genetically modified organisms in the European Union in light of new genomic techniques (NGTs) is examined, along with the regulatory response that introduces a distinction between two categories of NGT plants, making the regime more flexible for those that can be considered equivalent to conventional plants. It also highlights that the institutional agreement reflected in the Council’s position represents a significant shift from the case law of the Court of Justice. Regarding patents, it highlights the absence of substantial changes, opting instead for a cautious approach based on transparency, monitoring, and possible future intervention.
01 Jun, 2026
PUBLICATION
28 May, 2026
Voluntary takeover bids and squeeze-outs
The Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Fifth Chamber) of 13 May 2026 (Korfin and Sempiola v Slovnaft, Case C-225/25) clarifies the concept of a takeover bid for the purposes of Article 2 of the 2004 Takeover Bids Directive, such that an offer made to the holders of securities of a company with a view to acquiring all or some of those securities does not fall within the concept of a takeover bid where it is made by an offeror who already controls the offeree company. Consequently, based on that court’s interpretation of the Directive’s provisions, there is no right of squeeze-out in such voluntary takeover bids.
28 May, 2026
PUBLICATION
27 May, 2026
An action for declaration of invalidity of an already-terminated franchise agreement is admissible
An action for declaration of invalidity of an agreement can almost always be brought, even if the agreement has been performed and terminated.
27 May, 2026
PUBLICATION
26 May, 2026
Severance pay is a claim against the insolvent estate - not an insolvency claim - if a pre-opening-of-insolvency-proceedings dismissal is ruled unfair post hoc
Notwithstanding a dismissal occurring before the opening of insolvency proceedings, if a court finding of unfairness and an employer decision to make a severance payment occur after, the dismissed employee’s claim must be deemed against the insolvent estate, even if the parties had reached a settlement, if such was reached also after.
26 May, 2026