TEAM
With more than 13 years of experience, Hector has specialized his practice in the areas of Civil, Commercial and Family litigation, dealing with all kinds of matters and creating the best strategies according to the interests of his clients.
AREA OF EXPERTISE
Within his extensive experience, Hector has advised clients on contracts and legal proceedings related to the enforcement, interpretation and defense of commercial contracts. Also, he has handled several matters related to Insurance, Reinsurance and Bond Law, such as legal claims for the payment of insurance compensation, defense of the rights of the insured and special trial of bonds and protection in trial of the rights and obligations of Surety Institutions, among others.
Finally, he has plenty experience in procedures related to Property Rights, Civil Liability procedures (malpractice and medical liability, property damages, non-economic damages and punitive damages) and civil matters of individuals such as: divorces, alimony, disputes related to guardianship and custody and parental authority and the return of minors.
English and Spanish
- Universidad Iberoamericana.
- Masters Degree in Private Law at Universidad Nacional de Rosario.
- Certificate in American English for Students of Law at Yale Law School.
- Certificate in English for Legal Purposes and Introduction to US Law at Case Western Reserve University.
In 2014, Hector won a lawsuit against an international insurer, assuring his client that the insurer company would respect the original contractual conditions of his life insurance, due to the fact that the insurer increased the value of the annual premium in violation of the consumer rights by 1000%; achieving with the sentence that the insurer limits the increase of the premium according to the national consumer price index.
In the same way, another representative case, was an ordinary civil trial in which an European Clinic for Assisted Reproduction (client) was sued for non-economic damages for an alleged heterotopic pregnancy (when an embryo coincides in time intrauterine and another extrauterine) caused to the patient, demonstrating in the trial that said circumstance was an inherent risk to the procedure itself and of which the patient had previously been notified, in addition to the fact that there was evidence in the clinical file that the patient had only had one embryo implanted, also proving with international literature that the only embryo implanted in the patient could have divided, hence the average responsibility (medical care) and the Lex Artis Ad Doc had been met, so the accusation of medical responsibility was inadmissible.