Follow Us
As the billion-dollar arbitration between Reliance Industries’ JioStar (formerly Star India) and Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. (ZEEL) enters a crucial evidentiary hearing before the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) this month, the proceedings are being closely tracked across India’s media, legal and sports rights ecosystem. This is one of the most high-stakes disputes in the industry as ICC rights remain the most valuable cricket properties after the IPL.
The outcome is expected to not only resolve the question of who bears responsibility for the collapse of the ICC rights sublicensing deal but also influence how future sports broadcasting contracts approach payment security, performance conditions and risk allocation.
The dispute dates back to August 2022, when Star India, now operating under JioStar, entered into an agreement with Zee to sublicense television broadcast rights for ICC men’s and under-19 events in India for the 2024-2027 cycle, while retaining the digital rights.
Also read: Star India initiates arbitration against ZEEL over failed ICC deal
Zee seeks Rs 69 crore refund from Star after ICC TV deal failure
JioStar had secured the ICC rights for around USD 3 billion. For JioStar, the collapse of the arrangement meant recalibrating its broadcast and digital monetisation strategy for ICC events, since it ultimately absorbed the full cost of the rights.
For Zee, already dealing with financial strain and uncertainty following the collapse of its merger with Sony, the dispute has significant long-term capital allocation implications, observed industry experts.
According to experts, this arbitration could serve as a guide for drafting future sports rights agreements, forcing parties to define payment triggers and performance obligations far more clearly.
Suvigya Awasthy, Partner, PSL Advocates and Solicitors, said the outcome of this case will likely reinforce the importance of linking payment timelines with conditions such as regulatory or third-party approvals, making any non-fulfilment or delay a potential material breach. According to her, the case could usher in greater contractual discipline and risk transparency in future high-value broadcasting deals.
Rohit Jain, Managing Partner, Singhania and Co., said this dispute may push parties to revisit their contracts altogether by shifting from corporate guarantees to escrow accounts to safeguard payments. Future deals, he said, “will be with clauses linking payments to the buyer’s financial health or pending mergers. Licensors may also define material breach and conditions precedent more precisely to prevent loopholes.”
Also read: Star formally informs ZEE about termination of $1.5 billion ICC TV rights deal
ICC TV rights deal: Zee refutes Star India claims seeking $940 mn in damages
What the LCIA evidentiary hearings will examine
The evidentiary hearings scheduled this month are expected to be intensive and evidence-heavy, involving comprehensive examination of contractual timelines, witness testimonies, financial records and correspondence. Both sides will present fact witnesses, expert valuation evidence and documentation to establish causation and quantify damages.
According to B. Shravanth Shanker, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court, the LCIA tribunal will focus on determining whether Zee defaulted on the USD 203.56 million advance and bank guarantees, or whether Star failed to meet its conditions precedent such as securing ICC approval.
“Expect intensive cross-examination of fact witnesses from both parties, detailed expert testimony on financial damages and broadcasting valuations, comprehensive documentary review of correspondence and payment records, and hearings likely spanning one to two weeks. Post-hearing, parties will file written closing submissions before the tribunal closes proceedings and enters deliberation,” he said.
According to Shanker, the hearings will require exhaustive cross examination, expert opinion on broadcasting valuations and financial damages, and a detailed documentary record review.
Also read: Zee files $8 million counterclaim against Star India in ICC rights arbitration
What this case means for future sports rights deals in India
Talking about the impact on future sports rights negotiations, Shanker said this dispute will mandate stringent upfront payment security mechanisms such as bank guarantees, letters of credit and escrow arrangements becoming contractual pre-conditions rather than negotiable terms.
“Future contracts will feature precisely drafted conditions precedent with explicit timelines for regulatory approvals, step-in rights allowing primary rights holders to reclaim sublicensed rights upon default, and sophisticated force majeure clauses. Risk allocation will shift toward shorter commitment periods and increased consolidation among broadcasters, as smaller players recognize the financial risks of acquiring major cricket properties without adequate capitalization,” he explained.
Experts said the dispute may discourage complex sublicensing structures for premium sports properties, encouraging broadcasters to retain both television and digital rights rather than splitting them among financially weaker entities.
Rohit Jain added that billion-dollar sports rights structures will now require far stricter financial safeguards.
How long will the final award and enforcement take
Suhael Buttan, Partner, SKV Law Offices, said it is unrealistic to expect a swift award once the hearings conclude. LCIA matters of this complexity typically extend many months beyond oral hearings.
“Complex LCIA arbitrations usually take many months beyond the hearings. LCIA data show a median case takes around 20 months total, with awards coming roughly four months after final hearings. Commentators likewise expect this ICC rights dispute to stretch around two years from start to finish. In short, a ruling will not be immediate and the award and enforcement will likely arrive many months later,” Buttan said.
He added that enforcement may take significantly longer.
The losing party may challenge the award in English courts, adding six to 12 months. Enforcement in India may require twelve to twenty-four months in the High Courts, and appeals could extend that by another twelve to eighteen months. Overall, the timeline from the November 2025 hearings to final enforcement could stretch thirty to forty-eight months, potentially pushing the matter into late 2027 or early 2029.
Under the arrangement, Zee was expected to pay a first instalment of USD 203.56 million and furnish bank guarantees as part of its obligations.
Star alleges Zee failed to honour these commitments, triggering material losses. Star has quantified its damages at USD 1.003 billion, up from an earlier USD 940 million.
Zee denies default and contends that Star had not fulfilled key preconditions such as obtaining final ICC approval and completing required documentation. Zee has counterclaimed USD 8.06 million for bank guarantee commissions and interest incurred after the deal collapsed.
The arbitration began in March 2024, with filings continuing through December 2024.