Career Biography

Mónica María Soler is head of legal and judicial legal representative at Organización Terpel, one of Colombia’s leading fuel distribution and retail companies. Reporting directly to the general counsel within a six-person legal team, she leads the company’s litigation strategy across civil, commercial and criminal matters, while also overseeing intellectual property, client guarantee structures and merger advisory processes. Her legal counsel is transversal to all business areas of the organisation, providing strategic input at the highest level.

Mónica holds a Master’s degree in International Law from Universidad de la Sabana, awarded with Laureate distinction and an Excellence Scholarship, and is a graduate of Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Her academic formation is complemented by a career that spans both the private and public sectors. She began her career in the corporate practice of international law firms, before moving into public service as legal counsel to the Inspector Attorney General of Colombia and subsequently as legal adviser to the Vice-Ministry of Multilateral Affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Fluent in Spanish and English, Mónica brings a rigorous international legal perspective to her in-house practice. She has also been also a lecturer in Public and International Law at Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, and Universidad de la Sabana.

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

Over the past year, I have led several projects that reflect the strategic and transversal nature of Terpel’s legal function.

I have led the management of the company’s strategic litigation portfolio, coordinating both the technical and legal dimensions of complex disputes exceeding $1m. This has required a comprehensive and coordinated approach to protecting the company’s interests, articulating legal strategy with the operational reality of each business area involved.

I also led the development of two key internal policies for the legal function: a litigation policy and an intellectual property policy. The litigation policy establishes a corporate framework that coordinates the commercial, legal and reputational dimensions of the company’s approach to both initiating and defending legal actions. The intellectual property policy unifies the guidelines for trade mark management and protection across Colombia and other jurisdictions where Terpel operates. The litigation policy was developed in consultation with external advisers and key business areas, and the current focus is on their full rollout and training of commercial teams across the organisation.

I designed and executed a debt recovery strategy, in conjunction with external counsel, targeting a particularly challenging segment of the company’s client portfolio, resulting in the successful recovery of at least COP 900m ($260 000) for a specific business line — a measurable outcome with direct financial impact for the organisation.

In parallel, I have led the design of the company’s defence strategy in constitutional proceedings brought against Terpel, as a tool third parties used to pursue their commercial and contractual interests, successfully protecting the interests of both the service station business and other divisions.

I have also supported negotiations with third parties to prevent the consolidation of administrative sanctions by the Superintendencia de Industria y Comercio, structuring settlement agreements that allowed the company to mitigate significant economic and regulatory exposure.

Finally, I have provided legal support to internal criminal investigations conducted jointly with the audit team and external advisers, a sensitive area that requires close coordination and a rigorous approach to confidentiality and corporate governance.

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

Three initiatives from the past year illustrate how legal strategy has directly shaped Terpel’s commercial direction.

The most significant is my involvement in the merger process with a recently acquired company, as part of Terpel’s expansion into the energy transition portfolio. From securing regulatory authorisation from the competent authority through to the fulfillment of the corporate formalities — a process still underway — I have coordinated both internal teams and external counsel to ensure that legal considerations are fully integrated into the broader strategic and commercial objectives of the transaction.

I have also participated in negotiations within Terpel’s new energies business, reaching conciliation and settlement agreements with clients and suppliers that have prevented future disputes, resolved existing conflicts and enabled the successful completion and delivery of ongoing energy projects. My involvement directly protected the company’s reputation and the continuity of a strategically important business line.

I also led negotiations for the recovery of spaces previously granted under concession agreements across multiple service stations nationwide. By simultaneously negotiating the lifting of use restrictions, this process unlocked the expansion of Terpel’s convenience business; this was a commercial objective that required legal strategy to be conceived from the outset as a business enabler, not merely a dispute resolution mechanism.

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

Within companies, there is often a misconception that legal and commercial objectives are inherently at odds. In my experience, the most effective way to manage this tension is to ensure that the legal function is seen — and acts — as a genuine business partner from the outset, not as a last resort when problems arise.

The starting point is understanding that the company’s primary purpose is commercial, and that the legal team’s role is to enable that purpose safely and with managed risk. When legal counsel is involved early in a project or transaction, it is far easier to provide advice that is both legally sound and commercially useful. Being engaged only reactively, without sufficient context, rarely produces the best outcomes for anyone.

At Terpel, a company that has positioned itself as a national partner (Aliado País) and is firmly committed to operating within the law, the question is never whether to circumvent legal boundaries, but how to achieve commercial objectives within them. My approach has been to go beyond the legal documents and develop a deep understanding of the commercial, operational and financial dimensions of each matter. Understanding and speaking the language of each business line builds trust with internal stakeholders, and that trust is what makes them more receptive when you do need to say no — because they already know your advice is grounded in their reality, not just in legal formalism.

What major challenges or risks should in-house legal teams be preparing for over the next twelve months?

One of the most immediate challenges for in-house legal teams is the integration of AI and automation into legal processes. Rather than a threat, I see this as an opportunity: these tools can free legal teams from repetitive, operational tasks and allow them to focus on strategy and substance. However, this shift also raises the bar for what is expected of in-house counsel. To add real value, we must go beyond pure legal analysis and develop a genuine understanding of the financial, commercial, and operational dimensions of the matters we advise on. AI will accelerate the shift toward a model where legal expertise alone is no longer sufficient — business acumen is equally essential.

The second major challenge is navigating an increasingly volatile political and economic environment, both locally and globally. A significant part of the business sector is affected — directly or indirectly — by political shifts and their economic consequences. In-house legal teams must be equipped to anticipate regulatory changes, respond with agility and build risk assessment frameworks that are themselves agile — because a zero-risk scenario simply does not exist.

In times of uncertainty, companies must be willing to accept controlled risks and maintain a degree of tolerance for error in order to allow for innovation and keep business moving. The role of in-house counsel is not to eliminate risk entirely, but to assess it rigorously and advise accordingly — ensuring that the pursuit of certainty never becomes an obstacle to progress.