The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon
AV ANDRÉS BELLO 2711, 8TH FLOOR, 7550611 LAS CONDES, SANTIAGO, CHILE
Tel:
Work +56 2 2757 7600
Email:
Web:
www.bmaj.cl

 

Bofill Mir & Alvarez Jana (BMAJ) is a full-service Chilean law firm comprising of over 70 expert and highly qualified attorneys who are committed to giving unwavering support to clients via a specialized and creative goal-oriented approach. BMAJ was created in March 2009 as a result of a merger. Since then, the firm has earned much international recognition, setting itself apart with its two-pronged service offer of dispute resolution and the full range of corporate advice.

The firm's attorneys have studied at the most prestigious universities in Chile and many have LLMs from the finest programs in North America, Europe and Chile. They have also worked in major international law firms abroad, acted as professors at Chile's leading universities and held key government positions.

BMAJ's lawyers have been recognized at the forefront of their fields by the main legal directories and rankings, such as Chambers & Partners, The Legal 500, Latin Lawyer 250, Who's Who Legal, Best Lawyers, IFLR1000, Leaders League, and Global Arbitration Review (GAR).

The firm is strong in all key industry sectors such as banking and financial institutions, mining, energy and natural resources, construction and infrastructure, telecommunications and media, education and agriculture, among others.

BMAJ advises multinational and local companies. Its attorneys regularly handle high-profile transactions, joint ventures and project financing. The firm's experience in fund formation and complex structuring matters is widely recognized in the market.

The firm's attorneys' experience includes advising the Chilean government on the negotiation of free trade agreements, the ministry and other matters (Ministry of Energy and Ministry of Justice), the European Commission, the International Court of Justice and the WTO.

  • Partners
  • 13
  • Other fee-earners: 67
  • Total staff: 120
  • Languages
  • English
  • French
  • German
  • Spanish
  • Italian

Above material supplied by Bofill, Mir & Álvarez Jana.

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • Communiqué on Equity Crowdfunding Is Officially Published

    By way of background, in January 2019, the Capital Markets Board (“ CMB ”) had issued an announcement on its website on the Draft Communiqué on Equity Crowdfunding [1] . The CMB has now officially published the Communiqué on Crowdfunding No. III-35/A (“ Communiqué ”), on October 3, 2019. The Communiqué entered into force as of October 3, 2019.
  • Beneficial Ownership Concept new interpretation from the Russian federal tax service

    The recent interpretative letter issued by the Russian Federal Tax Services (“FTS”) on 08th August 2019, has provided further guidance as to the application of the Beneficial Ownership Concept, further to the letter initially provided on the 12th of April 2018 which adopted a strict approach of the concept. 
  • Cyprus and Netherlands Double Tax Treaty Update

    Cyprus has concluded the negotiations for the avoidance of double taxation with the Netherlands. The double tax treaty was agreed at technocratic level in Hague. It is expected to be signed by the end of 2019 or early in 2020.
  • Vacancy - Senior Corporate Lawyer

    The Senior Corporate Lawyer, who will be reporting to Partners, will be working with both the firm’s legal team as well as the financial services team. The successful candidate will be requested to show initiative, take on certain responsibilities within the firm, work in a multinational environment and will immediately be given the opportunity to further advance their career within the law firm.
  • CJEU RULED ON THE APPLICATION OF THE BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP CONCEPT

    The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on February 26, 2019, in the “Danish Beneficial Ownership Cases”, can be perceived as a landmark on the interpretation of the Beneficial Ownership concept under the Interest and Royalties Directive (IRD) and the Parent-Subsidiary Directive (PSD).
  • Court of Justice rules on source of income for Derivative Residence applications

    On 2 October 2019, the Court of Justice delivered its judgment in Bajratari v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Directive 2004/38/EC) Case C-93/18 which concerns Chen applications and the source of funds for self-sufficiency. 
  • End of the ‘centre of life test’ in Surinder Singh cases?

    In the recent case of  ZA (Reg 9. EEA Regs; abuse of rights) Afghanistan   [2019] UKUT 281 (IAC ), the Upper Tribunal found that there is no basis in EU law for the centre of life test, as set out in Regulation 9(3)(a) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (the “Regulations”). It further found that it is not to be applied when Judges assess  Surinder Singh  cases that appear before them.
  • ITALIAN RULES ON JOINT VENTURES IN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT AND CONCESSIONS

    Italian rules on jointventures concerning public procurement and concession contracts are set out inlight of the European legal framework provided for in Directive 2014/23/EU and 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council. The European rules aim to ensurethe best use of public money so that EU citizens benefit from strategicinvestments and services at fair prices. In this context, public procurementand concessions represent key instruments that need to be regulated and standardisedin order to ensure free movement of goods, freedom of establishment and freedomto provide services.
  • Terms of employment as a sole representative

    In this article we examine the working arrangements of sole representatives, looking at the terms and conditions of employment that the Home Office will expect a sole representative to have in order to qualify as a representative of an overseas business.  
  • Can Sole Representatives Be Shareholders?

    The Immigration Rules require that an applicant for a  sole representative visa  is not “a  majority shareholder in the overseas business”.