Go back to News
NEWS
Íñigo Erláiz new Managing Partner
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
Lawyer mentioned
Iñigo Erlaiz – Partner
More information about
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
PUBLICATION
¡NEW!
Consequences of the contractual link between individual bank loans taken out by commonhold unit-holders and restoration work agreed between the commonhold association and a third party
Supreme Court Judgment no. 919/2016 of 16 June is groundbreaking in two respects: first, in holding that unit-holders are parties to a contract between the commonhold association and a third party; and second, in holding that this contract is linked to the loan agreements concluded by a bank with said unit-holders.
PUBLICATION
2 days ago
The business judgment rule in a cooperative’s purchase of a financial product that ultimately fails
The first ruling to actually apply the business judgment rule in the determination of a claim in relation to liability.
Competition Blog
One week ago
Private Antitrust Litigation – Lexology Guide
Desafiar e executar sentenças arbitrais em Portugal – Guia GAR Know-How
PUBLICATION
One week ago
CJEU requires actual neutralisation of tax discrimination against non-resident collective investment schemes or, where there is tax transparency, against their unitholders
The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled in response to the Supreme Court that imposing a heavier tax burden on U.S. regulated investment companies than on resident collective investment schemes constitutes a restriction on the free movement of capital. Although such a restriction may be neutralised by the applicable double taxation treaty, that neutralisation must not be a merely theoretical possibility but must actually and fully be implemented, including with respect to the unitholders.
PUBLICATION
08 Oct, 2026
Ministerial Order TED/966/2026 of 15 September: creation of Spain’s capacity market
The creation of the capacity market will ensure availability of power in the mainland electricity system by paying providers that undertake to make capacity available during periods of stress, thereby ensuring the security of electricity supply.
PUBLICATION
23 Sep, 2026
Paradoxes of non-binding and entire agreement clauses being meta-clauses
Inasmuch as functioning as meta-clauses, non-binding and entire agreement clauses are paradoxical in a number of ways.
PUBLICATION
22 Sep, 2026
Social security deregistration over the weekend or on a non-working day to re-register on the next working day may be exempt from penalties
Employees who are deregistered over the weekend or on a non-working day and re-registered on the following working day do not engage in any conduct classified as a violation under employment penalty rules, although the employer’s conduct may, where applicable, be subject to liability of a different nature.
PUBLICATION
22 Sep, 2026
Air Berlin's insolvency proceedings in Spain and claims arising from employment contracts
The judgment, in line with the guidelines provided by the Court of Justice of the European Union on referral of questions raised in this case, offers interesting insights into the interpretation of the relationship between universal insolvency proceedings and territorial insolvency proceedings.
PUBLICATION
21 Sep, 2026
Pharma & Healthcare No. 50
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.