Marcio de Souza Polto

Professional Experience

Marcio de Souza Polto joined the Firm in 1998 and became partner in 2006. He coordinates the Dispute Resolution practice group. He has experience in American Law (Litigation, Complex Litigation and Trial Lawyering), as well as in local and international arbitrations.

Work abroad

He has worked in Ablfs & McKfnzif Miami office in the Dispute Resolution Group.

Awards and Recognitions

Marcio de Souza Polto has been recognized for his work in the Civil and Commercial Litigation category by the main legal directories such as LACCA Approved, Chambers Latin America, Chambers Global, Leaders League, Latin Lawyer 250, Análise Advocacia 500 and The Legal 500.

Academic Background

He graduated from the Law School of the University of Sao Paulo with a degree in Law, and also holds a master’s degree (LL.M Program) from the University of Pennsylvania Law School – UPENN (Philadelphia, U.S.A).

Activities outside the office

Marcio has participated, as an organizer and/or speaker, of events/seminars directed to lawyers and clients, addressing – inter alia – the following topics:

– “Pledge of Capital Quotas and Shares – Fitness and forms of judicial and extra-judicial  enforcement”;

– “Fraud committed against creditors and fraud in execution suits”;

–  “Arbitration – Article 2 of Law 9.307/96 vs. Article 9 of  (LICC) – effectiveness and validity”;

– “The New Arbitration Law”;

– “The New Brazilian Civil Code”;

– “Execution Suit and Third Party Opposition “;

– “Preliminary Negotiations and Pre-Contract – Effects and Legal Implications”;

– “Guarantees and the New Brazilian Civil Code”;

– “ADR – Arbitration, Mediation and Structured Negotiation”;

–  “Common Law and Brazilian Law”.

Besides, he is a professor – currently on leave – of civil Procedural Law.

Publications

Marcio is responsible for reviewing and/or drafting several legal articles published in the Revista Literária de Direito, and other specialized publications and/or magazines, addressing topics related to Civil and Civil Procedural Law, such as:

– “Procedural Aspects of the Writ of Mandamus”;

– “The New Arbitration Law”;

– “Certification of the Special and Extraordinary Appeals”;

–  “Law 9.756/98 and the Broadening of the Reporting Justices’ Authority”;

– “Pledge of Capital Quotas and Shares – Fitness and forms of judicial and extra-judicial enforcement” ;

– “Fraud committed against creditors and fraud in execution suits”.

Languages

English, Spanish and Italian

Representative matters and clients

– Representing some key-players such as Nestle, PepsiCo and Braskem in 81 class actions filed against more than 40 companies in order to force such companies to implement a reverse logistic system for reusable packaging. The lawsuits involves an aggregate value superior to BRL 1 billion.

– Representing LIEBHERR in an indemnification lawsuit involving a billionaire indemnification request, resulting from an accident with a crane manufactured by client.

– Representing Shell in strategic lawsuits filed by the Municipalities of Niterói and Maricá  before the federal justice system challenging certain costs deductions in the calculation of special participations due by the concessionaires in connection with oil fields exploration. These lawsuits are important judicial precedents and require great knowledge of governmental regulation in the oil and gas industry and interaction between EMI and litigation practice groups.

– Assisting certain owners of a commercial building in Brasilia (mostly Brazil’s largest pension funds) on a multimillionaire claim for damages against the biggest construction and real estate company of Midwest. This collection lawsuit requires not only outstanding legal knowledge, especially of enforcement and administrative misconduct, but also an investigative work to find, freeze and attach assets.

– Representing Toyota in a lawsuit filed against the national transport authority due to frauds that were preventing Toyota’s consumers to license their vehicles, in multimillion litigation. As a result of the lawsuit, a favorable decision was issued allowing Toyota to license the vehicles (otherwise, client would no longer be able to sell them to consumers).