Nation Media Group has lost a court battle over a KSh320 million (approximately UGX 9.1 billion) arbitration award related to the hit television drama Mali.
One of East Africa’s largest media companies, Nation Media Group (NMG), has lost its bid to overturn a KSh320 million (about US$2.5 million) arbitration award in a landmark ruling that could reshape how television broadcasters account for advertising revenue shared with content producers.
The High Court of Kenya has dismissed NMG’s application to set aside an arbitration award in favour of Al Is On Production (AIOP), the creators of the popular television drama Mali, ending an 11-year legal dispute that has become one of the region’s most closely watched media industry cases.
In a judgement delivered on July 2, Justice Francis Gikonyo ruled that Nation Media Group had failed to demonstrate any legal basis under Kenya’s Arbitration Act to invalidate the arbitrator’s decision. The court also recognised the award as a judgement of the High Court, clearing the way for its enforcement.
The dispute centred on advertising revenue generated by Mali, a groundbreaking television drama launched in 2011 and widely recognised as Kenya’s first locally branded soap opera.
The series aired on NTV in both Kenya and Uganda, as well as on the now-defunct QTV, attracting significant audiences and advertising interest during its broadcast.
Under the production agreement signed in May 2011, Nation Media Group received exclusive rights to sell and air commercial advertisements during the programme while sharing advertising income with Al Is On Production according to agreed contractual terms.
The relationship later deteriorated after AIOP questioned the broadcaster’s accounting of advertising revenues. The production company argued that although numerous commercial advertisements appeared during the programme, the financial statements it received reflected sponsorship revenue from only one advertiser—Nivea.
Seeking to verify the broadcaster’s figures, Mali creator Alison Ngibuini commissioned independent reviews by Ipsos Limited and Reelforge Systems. According to court records, the assessments identified substantial differences between the advertising actually aired and the revenue reports submitted by the broadcaster.
When negotiations failed, the dispute proceeded to arbitration in October 2015.
Throughout the arbitration proceedings, Nation Media Group was directed several times to produce advertising schedules, invoices, reconciliation statements and complete revenue records relating to the programme. With both parties’ consent, an independent expert was later appointed to audit all commercial spots aired during Mali between 2011 and 2016.
The arbitrator ultimately found that Nation Media Group had breached the production agreement by failing to provide the required financial documentation despite repeated orders. That failure, the arbitrator concluded, justified drawing an adverse inference against the broadcaster.
The final award totalled approximately KSh320 million, comprising KSh160.55 million in unpaid advertising revenue, accumulated interest, legal costs, arbitration expenses and assessment fees. Claims for punitive, aggravated and exemplary damages were dismissed.
Nation Media Group challenged the award before the High Court, arguing that the arbitrator had ignored its evidence, acted unfairly and reached conclusions that violated public policy.
Justice Gikonyo rejected each of those arguments, finding that the arbitration process had been conducted fairly and that the arbitrator had adequately considered the evidence presented by both parties before reaching the decision.
The ruling is likely to resonate well beyond Nation Media Group.
Across Africa, broadcasters increasingly rely on partnerships with independent production companies to create original local programming as audiences shift away from imported content.
Many of these agreements depend on complex revenue-sharing arrangements tied to advertising sales, sponsorships and commercial placements.
Media lawyers say the judgement sends a strong signal that broadcasters may face significant financial consequences if they fail to maintain transparent records or comply with contractual reporting obligations.
Equally, the decision reinforces arbitration as an effective mechanism for resolving high-value commercial disputes without lengthy court litigation.
The case also highlights the growing commercial value of African television content. As streaming platforms, broadcasters and advertisers invest more heavily in locally produced programming, disputes over advertising revenues, intellectual property rights and profit-sharing are expected to become increasingly common.
The judgement highlights the importance of corporate governance, financial transparency and contractual accountability in an industry that is rapidly becoming one of Africa’s fastest-growing economic sectors.