CkB is the director of television of SKC Limited, a broadcasting company. The new managing director of the company expressly forbade CKB from entering into any contracts for broadcasting rights. CKB however bought rights from OSMI Limited for the broadcasting of English Premier League, on its television network. SKC Limited refused to pay for the broadcast rights on the ground tha CKB Was not authorised to buy the rights. Advice OSMI Limited and SKC Limited as to their respective rights.
In this scenario, there are two parties involved: OSMI Limited (the company that sold the broadcasting rights for the English Premier League) and SKC Limited (the broadcasting company where CKB is the director of television). Let's examine the rights and obligations of each party:
1. OSMI Limited:
- OSMI Limited sold the broadcasting rights for the English Premier League to CKB, who is the director of television at SKC Limited.
- From OSMI Limited's perspective, they entered into a contract with CKB, and as long as CKB is acting within the scope of their authority within SKC Limited, they should have the right to enforce the contract and request payment for the broadcasting rights.
2. SKC Limited:
- The new managing director of SKC Limited expressly forbade CKB from entering into any contracts for broadcasting rights. This means that according to SKC Limited's internal rules, CKB did not have the authority to buy these broadcasting rights on behalf of the company.
- SKC Limited, therefore, has a valid argument for refusing to pay for the broadcast rights, claiming that CKB exceeded their authority by making the purchase without proper authorization.
Considering the circumstances, here is the advice for each party:
1. OSMI Limited:
- OSMI Limited should review the contract between their company and CKB and see if there are any provisions regarding authorization or limits to CKB's authority as a representative of SKC Limited. If there are no such provisions, OSMI Limited can argue that they entered into a valid contract with CKB and should be entitled to payment for the broadcasting rights.
- However, if the contract explicitly states that CKB should have authority from SKC Limited to make such purchases, OSMI Limited may have a weaker position to enforce the contract. In this case, OSMI Limited may need to negotiate with SKC Limited or seek legal advice to explore their options.
2. SKC Limited:
- SKC Limited should investigate whether CKB actually violated the terms set by the managing director regarding entering into contracts for broadcasting rights.
- If it is determined that CKB exceeded their authority, SKC Limited can argue that they are not liable for payment and should not be held responsible for CKB's actions.
- It is crucial for SKC Limited to examine their internal processes and ensure that any discrepancies in authority or authorization are addressed to avoid similar situations in the future.
In summary, while OSMI Limited may argue that they have a valid contract with CKB and are entitled to payment, SKC Limited can counter by stating that CKB did not have the authority to purchase the broadcasting rights. The ultimate resolution will depend on the specific terms of the contract between OSMI Limited and CKB, as well as the internal policies and procedures of SKC Limited. Legal advice should be sought to clarify the rights and obligations of each party.