Specialties

Throughout more than 30-year professional career, he has developed successively in the areas of administrative law, economic competition, amparo, litigation and corporate law.

He has also been an arbitrator in both equity and International Chamber of Commerce arbitrations.

He has also participated in the elaboration and lobbying of more than 100 relevant constitutional, legal and regulatory reforms. It stands out that he was co-creator of the regulatory improvement instruments that are still applied.

Since 2020, he has focused on strategic legal advice, combining the experience acquired in the various specialties to which he has dedicated himself. He is also a member of Boards of Directors.

Strategic legal advice is suitable for addressing, dealing with and resolving particularly complex or sensitive issues with legal (as well as sometimes social and political) components or effects.

Generally, taking into account existing circumstances and external factors, it requires an in-depth analysis of all possible alternatives in order to define the optimal way to proceed.

It is also necessary a global vision, broad legal and general criteria, knowledge, experience and objectivity to identify strengths, weaknesses, risks and opportunities, as well as creativity and the ability to dialogue, negotiate and work with multidisciplinary teams.

The diversity of relevant issues in which Rafael M. Brito Anderson has had to participate both as an advisor and as a litigator and the opportunity he has had to interact during many years of professional practice with important businessmen, CEOs of companies, Secretaries of State, Governors, Attorneys, Senators, Deputies, Ministers and Magistrates of the Judiciary, first level officials and other lawyers and professionals, was what motivated him, at the recommendation of several of his clients, to focus on strategic legal advice.

Likewise, this naturally led him to be invited as a member of Boards of Directors.

He provides his advice in a personal way, with total transparency and the highest ethics towards its clients, always putting the greatest benefit of those it represents as well as seeking fair solutions; the foregoing, out of court to the extent possible.

He plans, proposes and explains the actions to be carried out, for their execution by third parties hired by his clients or suggested to them (other recognized lawyers in various specialties, economists, accountants, lobbyists, media consulting firms, investigators, etc. ), generally Rafael M. Brito Anderson be involved directly only in the execution of the most relevant actions and negotiations that require it.

He has in-depth knowledge of administrative law.

His experience covers practically all areas related to the Federal, State and Municipal Governments, both in consulting to the government and companies, as well as in amparo, litigation and administrative arbitration.

He has also participated in numerous legal reforms in the area of administrative law (see the Legal Reforms section).

Regulated Activities

He has issued interpretations and opinions on regulatory risks and the solution to them in multiple areas, such as telecommunications, energy, airport, civil aviation, motor transport, rail, port, games and raffles, water, health, animal and plant health, urban development. and environmental.

He has advised clients on concessions, permits and authorizations, as well as in relation to a large number of legal problems that they have had in the exercise of their activities.

Public Private Associations, Tenders and Contracts

He advised the Federal Government in relation to long-term service provision contracts in penitentiary matters for more than $160,000 million pesos.

He advised the Federal Government in the conceptualization and elaboration of the legal instruments related to a public-private association project with a value of 10,000 million dollars.

He has ruled on unsolicited proposals on telecommunications and public safety.

He has advised government agencies in the design and implementation of important bidding processes and exceptions to them (restricted invitations and direct awards).

He has advised companies to participate in tenders, as well as in challenging them, in the telecommunications, port, surgical instrument sectors, etc.

Tourist developments, Zofemat, aerodromes and other real estate issues

After resolving all the conflicts that existed on the land, he designed and coordinated a legal, social, political and media strategy, which concluded with obtaining authorization for the Comprehensive Tourism Development Master Plan and Environmental Impact Statement on the largest tourist area authorized to the private initiative in the history of Mexico, as well as the authorization of land uses and corresponding subdivisions.

He has designed and implemented legal strategies regarding concessions in the federal maritime land zone, in order to keep that area free of third parties, at the lowest possible cost. This, in tens of kilometers of beach and cliffs (with respect to the latter, he structured the argumentation and contentious strategy to support the non-existence of a federal maritime land zone).

He designed and implemented a legal strategy to achieve the reopening of an important private aerodrome without the need to initiate litigation. The Ministry of Communications and Transportation had denied the extension of the permit on the grounds that the land was in dispute; in this regard, he proposed to the state government that it decree a limitation of temporary domain while the litigation lasted and that it request the permit in the state government name, with the company covering the corresponding operating expenses.

He obtained, through a non-contentious administrative procedure, the cancellation of the registration of several public deeds and cadastral keys to invaders of 960 hectares. Subsequently, he represented the company on behalf of which he promoted the aforementioned cancellation, as a third party affected in the amparo lawsuit filed by the invaders against the cancellation, getting them to deny the suspension they requested, as well as the amparo in which they alleged violation of the guarantee of hearing.

Through the execution of creative actions in terms of administrative law, he has successfully combated invasions.

Amparo, litigation and administrative arbitration

He has successfully challenged the unconstitutionality of various laws and regulations, as well as arbitrary acts of the authority in a multiplicity of matters.

He has achieved the revocation of concessions granted to third parties.

He obtained the recognition of several companies as affected third parties in an amparo trial against laws (as far as is known, he was the first lawyer to achieve such recognition in Mexico).

He has successfully combated enforcement measures and sanctions.

He has achieved multiple significant provisional and final stays of excecutions and injunctions.

He has successfully advised public servants in administrative liability proceedings.

He has been an arbitrator and expert in relevant arbitration proceedings in administrative matters.

The matter of economic competition began in Mexico with the entry into force, in June 1993, of the first Federal Law of Economic Competition. Rafael M. Brito Anderson began his practice in this matter in 1995 as an external legal adviser to the then Federal Competition Commission for the attention of particularly complex cases and, together with the then Executive Secretary of said Commission, devised and prepared the regulatory reform by which divided and regulated the investigation and trial procedures. Years later, he also participated in the proposal of various provisions contained in the laws and regulations that include regulations in the area of economic competition.

He has dealt with all types of procedures, in a multiplicity of markets (radio broadcasting, open and restricted television, internet, fixed and cellular telephony, interconnection, satellite, airport, banking, exchange centers, games and raffles, health, stores self-service, real estate, various consumer goods, such as milk, snacks, beers, etc.) and has contributed to the formation of precedents both by the administrative authority and by the Federal Judiciary.

Amparo and economic competition litigation (monopolistic practices and prohibited concentrations)

He has obtained firm condemnatory resolutions against companies that have committed monopolistic practices.

In addition, he has successfully challenged several high-profile mergers, such as a merger that was intended to take place between a major Mexican television company and one of the largest radio broadcasting networks, and another merger between two of the three Mexican rail trunk companies.

He has also obtained relevant acquittal resolutions in cases initiated by the authority, both ex officio and mediating a complaint, for the possible commission of absolute and relative monopolistic practices. This has been achieved at various stages of the procedure: during the investigation stage; when the matter is resolved by the competent authority; and also on the occasion of the presentation of clients commitments in order to qualify for the benefit of waiving the amount of fines.

He was the one who for the first time successfully challenged the unconstitutionality of the first Federal Law on Economic Competition for prohibiting the participation of affected third parties in the merger notification processes.

He has successfully fought fines imposed as a measure of urgency by the competition authority, when its clients had not discharged undue information requests that the authority had made.

Merger notification

He obtained the approval of the most important concentration and "buying club"; that has been carried out in Mexico by self-service stores in the market for the acquisition of inputs and wholesale purchase of merchandise. It was a complex matter, devised to prevent that the carrying out of absolute monopolistic practices could be argued later to be done by those who gathered with the aim of, as a whole, buying products: it was resolved, in the first instance, with three votes against and two in favor in the Plenary of the then Federal Competition Commission, and later reconsidered favorably by said Plenary, with four votes in favor and one against.

He proposed the first simple concentration notification procedure, as well as the first simplified concentration notification procedure, and implemented said procedures in a variety of cases.

Opinions of the authority

He processed favorable opinions from the competition authority to allow the participation of clients in important public tenders.

He was the one who for the first time successfully combated the fact that the competition authority did not allow the formal participation of third-party companies when issuing its prior opinion for the granting of concessions, even achieving the suspension of the corresponding bidding processes (known was the suspension he obtained from public tenders in 2004 for the granting of concessions for the use and exploitation of frequency bands of the radio spectrum for mobile telephony).

He also participated in the design and implementation of the strategy for the then Federal Competition Commission to issue opinions on the existence of substantial power in various telecommunications markets.

Opinions to companies

He has issued opinions on non-competition clauses, in order to safeguard the interests of his clients and, at the same time, the process of competition and free competition.

He has given multiple opinions to trade union organizations and companies to prevent the commission of conduct contrary to the regulations on economic competition, as well as to negotiate that other economic agents stop carrying out conducts that affected his clients.

In addition to handling important amparos and litigation in matters of administrative law and economic competition (see the sections related to these specialties), he has also done so in matters of conflicts between shareholders and real estate, among which stand out:

Nullity of shareholders' meetings, as well as of purchase and sale contracts of more than 3,500 hectares of a tourist development.

The precedent was double minutes of shareholders' meetings and an operation carried out by an American, with the collaboration of Mexican lawyers, improperly transferring more than 3,500 hectares with more than 15 kilometers of beaches and cliffs. In this case, Rafael M. Brito Anderson coordinated 22 civil, commercial, administrative, and criminal trials, appeals, and amparos, achieving that the matter was resolved as fraudulent in the United States of America and that all acts related to that case were declared null and void in Mexico, an immigration alert was issued against the American and he was consigned and apprehended, setting him the highest bail in the judicial history of Baja California Sur, for more than 777 million pesos.

Defense of the real estate property of a tourist development of more than 1,600 hectares.

The precedent was a 7-year litigation that followed a company losing in the second instance the ownership of an important tourist development of more than 1,600 hectares, with more than 10 kilometers of beaches and cliffs. In that case, Rafael M. Brito Anderson was hired to prepare and file, ultimately, the direct amparo claim against the previous resolution, getting the property resolved in favor of his client.

Together with Dr. Fernando Salas Vargas (at that time Coordinator of Advisors to the Secretary of Commerce and Industrial Development and Head of the Economic Deregulation Unit; and later the first Head of the Federal Commission for Regulatory Improvement), he devised, elaborated and lobbied before Congress of the Union the creation of the Federal Commission for Regulatory Improvement (now the National Commission for Regulatory Improvement), the Regulatory Impact Statement (currently Regulatory Impact Analysis) and the Federal Registry of Procedures and Services, which were approved by the Legislative Branch in 1996 unanimously.

Its participation in reforms has been extensive and in a variety of matters, both private law (Civil Code of the Federal District, Commercial Code, General Law of Titles and Credit Operations and Code of Civil Procedures of the Federal District), as well as legal administrative, regulated activities and in indigenous matters (Federal Law of Administrative Procedure, Law of Acquisitions, Leases and Services of the Public Sector, Law of Public Works and Related Services and Federal Law on Metrology and Standardization and its Regulations; Law of Foreign Investment and its Regulations; Regulations of the Federal Law on Economic Competition; during the term of President Zedillo, draft amendment to Article 27 of the Constitution on electricity and design and formulation of the legal framework for the opening of private investment in the electricity industry; Regulations of the Airport Law, the Civil Aviation Law, the Railway Service Law and the Navigation Law; Forest Law; Model Law for the States of the Republic in Water Matters; Plant Health Regulations; Reform to the Law of Livestock Associations; Regulations for the Provision of the Tourist Service of the Timeshare System; various laws and regulations of the Federal District; reform of 2001 to the Political Constitution of the State of Mexico; Administrative Code of the State of Mexico; and Law of the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples).