What are the major cases or transactions you have been involved in recently?

Over the past year, I have been closely involved in the deployment of Nexxus Private Debt Fund II, our private credit strategy focused on providing flexible financing solutions to medium and large Mexican companies, particularly those in growth, transition or complex financing situations. The fund is designed to provide bespoke capital solutions, including senior secured, mezzanine and structured financing, with a strong emphasis on downside protection, collateral packages, covenant design and alignment with management teams. As private credit continues to gain relevance in Mexico, our role increasingly involves structuring solutions that sit between traditional bank financing and equity, allowing companies to access capital tailored to their specific needs.

In parallel, I have also been actively involved in strategic financial advisory transactions across the Nexxus platform. These mandates often require us to evaluate not only legal and transactional considerations, but also capital structure, governance, financing alternatives, strategic partnerships and potential M&A outcomes. This has further expanded the role of the legal function from transaction execution to broader strategic decision-making alongside investment and management teams.

How do you approach managing legal aspects during periods of instability or crises, and how does your legal strategy align with the broader business strategy to ensure the organisation’s resilience?

In periods of instability, whether caused by market volatility, regulatory shifts or operational disruption, my first priority is to maintain clarity and predictability for management and investors. At Nexxus, our funds operate across multiple jurisdictions and industries, so crisis management requires both agility and discipline. The goal is not only to navigate crises safely, but also to position the organisation to capitalise on opportunities that disruption may reveal.

I work closely with the investment and risk committees to align the legal response with the firm’s broader strategy: protecting asset value, ensuring liquidity and maintaining investor confidence. This often involves scenario-based analysis, immediate risk mapping across our portfolio companies, and proactive communication with trustees, regulators and limited partners.

General counsel often speak of the need to be strategic to reach the pinnacle of the profession. What does being strategic mean to you?

To me, a strategic general counsel needs to understand the business model, the economics of a transaction, the incentives of the different stakeholders and, most importantly, which risks actually matter. Our role is not simply to identify legal risks, but to distinguish between risks that need to be eliminated, risks that can be mitigated and risks that the business should consciously accept.

That also requires being involved early. If legal only enters the conversation once the commercial terms have already been agreed, the ability to create value is limited. The most effective legal teams participate when the strategy itself is being developed, whether that means structuring an investment, designing a financing, evaluating an acquisition or deciding how to address a difficult situation in a portfolio company.

Ultimately, I think being strategic means helping the organisation make better decisions. Sometimes that means protecting the business from risks others have not identified; sometimes it means finding a structure that allows a transaction to happen; and sometimes it means telling the business that a legally available option is simply not the right commercial decision.

We are currently living through a time of geopolitical change, and the world order that we have come to take for granted for many years is being rewritten. Does this affect your company’s risk profile and, if so, what are you doing to mitigate this?

Absolutely. Geopolitical risk is increasingly becoming a direct business and investment risk rather than something that can be treated as a purely macroeconomic issue. For an investment platform focused on Mexico, developments in the relationship between Mexico, the United States and other major economies can affect portfolio companies through tariffs, supply chains, foreign investment regulation, currency volatility, financing conditions and changes in cross-border trade. These risks can also affect valuation, exit timing and the availability of capital.

Our approach is not to try to predict geopolitical outcomes, but to make our investment structures more resilient to different scenarios. That means placing greater emphasis on downside protection, liquidity, leverage levels, covenant packages, security structures and concentration risks. It also means understanding where each portfolio company is exposed, whether through customers, suppliers, exports, imports, regulation or financing, and incorporating those risks into both due diligence and ongoing portfolio monitoring.

From a legal perspective, I think one of the biggest changes is that we increasingly need to think in scenarios rather than in static legal frameworks. A transaction that works under today’s regulatory, trade or financing environment should also be tested against what happens if those conditions change materially. In that sense, geopolitical uncertainty has reinforced something that is already central to private equity and private credit: you cannot eliminate uncertainty, but you can structure investments so that you have more options when circumstances change.