What are the key projects you have been involved in over the past twelve months?

Over the past twelve months, one of the most significant projects I have been involved in was the strategic sale process of Frontera, which evolved through multiple stages, initially involving Geopark and ultimately culminating in a transaction with Parex. I played an important role throughout this process, with an active participation in the legal structuring, supporting negotiations, and coordinating the legal workstreams through to closing. This transaction is probably one of the most important deals of the year in Colombia and it was structured and negotiated in a very short time frame requiring navigating complex regulatory, contractual and cross-border considerations, including performing a corporate reorganisation that involved several entities and jurisdictions.

As a result of this transaction, Parex Resources became the biggest private crude oil producer in Colombia and consolidated its position as a key player in the hydrocarbon market in Latin America.

In addition, I led the legal team responsible for the recapitalisation financing of Frontera’s interest in Oleoducto de los Llanos Orientales (ODL), a significant structured finance transaction involving an amended and restated credit facility of up to $220m with a syndicate of lenders led by Macquarie Bank. This transaction was particularly complex given its non-recourse nature, multi-tranche debt structure and reliance on the underlying cash flows of a pipeline which is of pivotal importance in Colombia’s oil transportation portfolio.

My role included overseeing the legal structuring of the financing, negotiating the credit and guaranty arrangements, coordinating with lenders, external counsel and internal stakeholders and ensuring compliance with applicable regulatory frameworks. The successful closing enabled the company to unlock value for Frontera’s investors by supporting capital returns initiatives while maximizing the value of a critical infrastructure asset.

Can you describe an instance where your legal advice directly influenced business strategy or commercial objectives?

A notable example where my legal advice directly shaped business strategy was in the design and execution of a comprehensive approach to reduce the company’s exploration commitments.

Facing a combination of security, social and environmental challenges in certain contracted areas, I led the legal strategy to pursue the mutual termination of several exploration and production agreements. This required a carefully structured legal and regulatory approach, balancing strict contractual obligations with the need to reflect the operational realities on the ground.

My role involved developing the legal framework to support negotiations with the corresponding authorities and ensuring that the process was conducted in a manner that protected the company’s long-term interests and reputation. A critical aspect of this work was articulating a legally sound and technically viable rationale that enabled constructive engagement with the regulator while mitigating potential disputes or penalties.

The successful execution of this strategy resulted in a reduction of more than $60m in exploration commitments, significantly improving capital efficiency and allowing the company to reallocate resources toward higher-value opportunities within its portfolio.

Beyond the immediate financial impact, this initiative contributed to streamlining the company’s investment strategy, reducing exposure to high-risk assets and reinforcing a disciplined approach to capital allocation.

How can in-house counsel use AI to improve efficiency while maintaining quality, governance and integrity within legal teams?

AI is a powerful tool that enables legal teams to significantly enhance efficiency across a range of activities, particularly in document drafting, contract review and legal research. By reducing the time spent on routine and repetitive tasks, AI allows in-house lawyers to focus more on strategic, high-value work, ultimately strengthening the contribution to the business from the legal team.

However, like any powerful tool, AI must be used thoughtfully and responsibly. Its effective adoption requires not only access to robust and reliable platforms, but also a clear understanding of its limitations and associated risks, including accuracy, confidentiality and potential bias.

To address these challenges, in-house legal teams must establish appropriate frameworks around AI usage. This includes defining the correct AI platforms, clear use cases, implementing validation and human oversight processes and ensuring that sensitive data is handled in compliance with internal policies and applicable regulations. Equally important is investing in continuous training, so that legal professionals can interact effectively with AI tools and reduce the associated risks.

How do you manage situations where legal advice and commercial objectives conflict?

Managing the tension between legal advice and commercial objectives is a fundamental aspect of the in-house role. In my experience, the most effective way to address this is by positioning the legal function as a trusted service partner to the business, one that is not only technically strong, but also commercially aware and solution/business oriented.

It is critical that internal stakeholders perceive the legal team not as a barrier but as a reliable service provider and a problem-solver. This requires consistently demonstrating a willingness to understand the business context, engage early, and actively contribute to finding viable paths forward. Even in situations where risks cannot be eliminated, legal should aim to propose structured alternatives that allow the business to achieve its objectives within an acceptable risk framework.

Building this credibility over time has a significant impact. When a legal team is known for being pragmatic and commercially aligned, its advice carries greater weight. As a result, when legal does need to challenge or oppose a particular course of action, business stakeholders are more likely to trust that position, recognising that it is based on a well-founded and carefully considered assessment rather than a purely conservative approach.

Ultimately, the goal is not to avoid conflict entirely, but to manage it constructively, ensuring that decisions are made with full transparency of risks, while preserving strong collaboration and alignment across the organisation.