1ST RGNUL SPORTS & ENTERTAINMENT LAW NATIONAL MEDIATION

COMPETITION

April 12-14, 2019

Mediation Plan Outline

Team Code: TC - 03
Prelim: 2
Party: Community Prime

 Core Issue

Community Prime (herein after ‘Prime’) feels that the relationship between the parties has
fundamentally broken down. Prime feels that it did not violate its contractual liabilities in the
production of the documentary at hand. It does not believe that it is reasonable for the other party
to question the work of Prime on the basis of their personal expectations and subjective opinions,
the meeting of which was not the objective of the agreement between the parties. Further, Prime
feels that filing an application for Stay Order and a Defamation suit by Bhaskar Aggarwal (herein
after ‘Bhaskar’) against Prime is done in bad faith.

However, Prime feels that a matter solved amicably ensures the existence of present and future
relationships and a chance of other endeavours between the two parties. The following form the
main interests from the side of Prime and will also be proposed as Agendas (subject to further
additions) in the mediation process:-
1. Scheduled release of the documentary as per the set deadline.
2. Commercial promises made by Prime to other parties.
3. Mitigating the serious harm to the reputation of Prime.
4. Withdrawal of the Stay Order application filed in the local District Court by Bhaskar.
5. Dropping of the Defamation suit against Prime.
6. No change in the advisory capacity of Bhaskar.

[1]
  Know your ZOPA
Your Goals (financial and other)
1. The major concern of Prime is the scheduled
release of the documentary on account of the
commercial promises, investments,
arrangements etc. sought for the purpose of the
project and its release. This concern extends to
the reputation of Prime which is hanging by a
thin thread at the time being due to the
defamation suit and stay order application.
2. Resolution of the abovementioned bones of
contention facilitates Prime in reaching its final
objective that is to become a known-name in
the field of online streaming and generate a
fan-base for themselves.
3. Financial interests include increased revenues
and financial standing. Further, gaining more
viewership would also lead to prosperous
business for Prime.
And My high expectation is:
1. Proving that there was no breach of contract
from the side of Prime on two basis:
a. The method of shooting was through
shadowing and what was shot was
shown exactly for the purposes of the
[2]
Their Goals (financial and other)
1. The major concern of Bhaskar is his prized
reputation as an Indian professional
sportsman and a motivational leader.
According to him, the release of the
documentary will raise questions on his
lifestyle and choices, thereby negating his
hard earned name. Since he is a motivational
leader, he also wishes to encourage more
people from the documentary and wishes to
resonate the message of strength through it.
2. His main interests lie in the distribution of the
documentary so as to bring him more name
and prosperity. The same will also ensure
more capital gains for him as well as for
Prime itself.
3. Such a documentary will create certain work
avenues for a retired player and more
opportunities may reach his doorstep because
of it. Hence, he should capitalise on it.
They will be hoping for:
1. Bhaskar will either propose a termination of
the agreement or the continuance of the same,
subject to certain changes in the same:
a. Upon terminating the contract for
breach, he will be seeking damages.
 documentary, leaving no room for
malafide improvisations.
b. The same has been suggested on the
basis of personal expectations and
subjective opinions of Bhaskar.
2. Taking a rigid stand on the release date of the
documentary as tomorrow.
3. Explaining Prime’s commercial responsibilities
to Bhaskar with regards to other investors and
parties; and if the same are not followed, there
will be huge losses to be incurred.
4. An offer of increased royalties from the side of
Prime will be accepted by Bhaskar; and if the
same is not, innovative additions to the same
will sweeten the pot.
5. Retention of Bhaskar only in advisory capacity
for the continuance of the contract.
6. Withdrawal of stay order application and
defamation suit by Bhaskar.
7. Public apology to be issued by Bhaskar for his
actions.
8. Acceptance of a mutually beneficial agreement
of compromise by Bhaskar.
[3]
b. In case he continues the contract, he
would demand a delay in release or
change of content or both.
2. A change in the release date of the
documentary or a delay to the effect.
3. To change the content of the documentary to
fall in line with Bhaskar’s ideas and
expectations.
4. Seeking more powers and say than advisory
capacity in the final cut of the production.
5. A disclaimer in the documentary to the effect
that the contents of the same are fictitious.
6. Some amount of money in lieu of the
supposed breach of contract from the side of
Prime. (The point of breach will be contested
in the mediation and a rigid stand may be
taken by Bhaskar on the same, suggesting a
breach. Hence, this money would be asked by
him to “sweeten the pot”.) He could propose
an increase in the royalties being given to
him.
7. A public apology from Prime.
8. Acceptance of a mutually beneficial
agreement of compromise by Prime.
The minimum we expect is (and why): The minimum they will expect is (and why):

1. Rigidity on date of release of documentary due 1. Due to the extensive loss of reputation that
to the following reasons– can be caused by the release of the
documentary (subjective view), Bhaskar will
a. Fulfilment of the contract is obligatory
put forth demands on the line of-
for both parties.
a. Delay in the release of the
b. No breach of contract from the side of
documentary with changes made to
Prime.
the content through censorship,

c. Commercial liabilities of Prime changing sub-titles and cutting out

towards its investors and other parties, some scenes.

the non-fulfilment of which would

b. A disclaimer added to the
cause huge monetary losses.
documentary that the contents of the

2. Withdrawal of defamation suit since same are fictitious.

publication of ‘Truth’ is an exception to

2. An increase in the amount of royalties being
defamation argued. Therefore, if this matter
offered to Bhaskar.
was taken up in court, Prime believes that they
would emerge as the winners for the same. 3. A public apology from the side of Prime for
the misconstrued elements of the
3. Withdrawal of stay order to maintain amicable
documentary.
relations between the parties.

4. A public apology for the actions undertaken by

Bhaskar because it led to loss of great
reputation on the part of Prime as well as
commercial difficulties with regards to the
release of the documentary.

5. That if a disclaimer is added, the same does not

suggest the entire content to be fictitious; since
Prime promised a documentary to its viewers
and investors and not a fictitious story.

[4]
  Know your Alternatives – BATNA / WATNA
The BATNA for Prime is achieved by Mediation and the WATNA is a consequence of
Litigation.
Your Perspective:
BATNA
1.The best alternative for Prime is to continue
with Mediation because it is less expensive, less
cumbersome, confidential, more compromising
and ensures maintenance of future relationships
with benefits to both the parties.
2. Mediation offers a negotiating chance for the
following:
a. Amount of royalties, if they are increased.
b. Role of Bhaskar, if not in advisory capacity.
c. Content of disclaimer, if used.
3. Prime’s objectives require it to bring quality
films, documentaries etc to its platform and so,
this documentary and a workable relationship
with Bhaskar is important to Prime, with respect
to third parties. This relationship can be
maintained by Mediation.
4. Plea of loss of reputation makes the stand of
Prime very strong.
WATNA
1. Demerits of Litigation include great expenses,
wastage of time, delayed process of Court, no
confidentiality in Court, no maintenance of
amicable relationships between the parties and the
aggravation of tension between the parties.
2. If the matter goes to Court, an immediate
injunction will be put on the documentary, which
[5]
Their Perspective:
BATNA
1. The best alternative for Bhaskar is to go to
Litigation due to the following reasons:
a. In such a matter, the first step taken by the
Court is putting an injunction on the release of
the documentary and such will allow immediate
relief to Bhaskar.
b. The Court may be more inclined towards
ruling in favour of the subject of the
documentary, since he is the best judge of the
story of his life and career.
2. Due to lack of specialisation, the court shall
ask another authority to set the royalty rates and
these are usually high for the subject of the
documentary.
3. Plea of loss of reputation hold a great stand in
a Court.
4. Courts are inclined towards parties in fault to
issue a public apology to the aggrieved party.
WATNA
1. It is Litigation for Bhaskar because as soon as
the matter becomes public, questions on the
character and career of Bhaskar will be raised by
viewers and his fans alike.
2. Since the Court is not an expert in film-
making and creativity analysis, the suggestion of
misconstrued elements of the documentary can
is the main concern for Prime.
3. Further, a question on the content of the
documentary can be raised by the subject of the
film since he is the best judge of the same. Thus,
if the matter goes to Court, the Court may be
inclined to rule in his favour.
Your costs to date:
It includes all the money put into production of
the documentary, writing the screenplay as per the other hand, they are in a better financial
demand of the subject, principal photography and
videography, technical support, production
design, editing, sound mixing, test screenings,
remuneration of the various employees and
assistants etc.
It also includes money put in by investors,
sponsors and subscriptions of audience for
viewing the documentary.
Your costs in court:
The money put into the institution of a legal team
for the purpose of tackling with the defamation
suit and stay order filed by Bhaskar.
It in inclusive of the Court fee and the fee of the
legal team.
Your chances of winning/losing at trial:
Chances of winning are slim because the Court
will be inclined to give a decision in favour of
Bhaskar, due to the reasons cited before. Further,
no negotiation opportunity will be offered on the
increased obligations of Prime, leading to more
[6]
go in favour of either of the party.
3. Such an action spoils Bhaskar’s relationship
with Prime and may cause apprehension in the
minds of all those parties who are looking
forward to working with him.
Their costs to date:
It only includes their Litigation costs. On the
condition because Prime gave them monetary
benefits for the making of the documentary.
Their costs in court:
The institution of a legal team for the purposes of
filing the defamation suit and stay order
application in the Court.
It is inclusive of the Court fee and fee of the legal
team.
Their chances of winning/losing at trial:
Chances of winning are good, but not very high,
due to the reasons cited before. However, the
Court’s inclination to put an injunction on the
documentary will solve immediate problems of
Bhaskar’s loss of reputation.
loss.

Your hidden costs: Their hidden costs:

More royalties to be offered to Bhaskar for the
continuance of the contract and release of the
documentary. Compensation to be paid to the
sponsors, investors etc for the flak received, in
case a disclaimer of “Fictitious Events” is added
in the documentary.
Lost reputation in case of delay in release of the
documentary and incidental commercial
difficulties.
Since the documentary has not been released no
profits have been acquired as such by Prime and it
is in financial difficulty.
If the documentary is released, the loss of
reputation may cause Bhaskar to lose other
employment opportunities or work opportunities
in the future. He will lose his image as a
motivational speaker and a man of great
character.
People investing in Bhaskar such as sponsors etc
may withdraw their investments.

 Strings attached?

Since Prime is an online streaming platform, its main objective is seeking opportunities for production
and management of cinematographic works. Producing works on real-life stories of struggle and
talent are appreciated world-wide and bring in the most viewership numbers. Hence, if the mediation
is smoothly concluded, it offers Prime to capitalize on its produced work and can hope for more such
opportunities to come its way.

With the other party/third parties:
Good relations with Bhaskar can help in
additional promotion of the film, but does not
affect the commercial or business concerns of
Prime directly.
What is at stake for them to lose?
Bhaskar is not concerned about his relationship
with Prime. However, a sour end to the
mediation could result in release of the
documentary causing a huge reputational crisis

[7]
However, amicable terms with the subject of the for Bhaskar.
cinematographic work go on to show the business
His reputation as a person of great character,
nature of Prime with its clients and affects its
motivational speaker and role model will be
reputation indirectly. This is with regards to third
destroyed. He would also lose out on future
party perspectives.
employment and work opportunities because of
Moreover, amicable terms with the subject of the the same.
work and other third parties bode well with the
People presently investing in Bhaskar would
sponsors, investors etc of Prime and builds a
withdraw the same; and the National and
strong relationship of trust (on the basis of the
International Kabaddi community may boycott
business capabilities and crisis management of
him.
Prime) between Prime and them.

 Timelines and Deadlines

There are certain deadlines that are required to be met by Prime, but the same is not true for
Bhaskar.

For you: For them:

It is necessary for Prime to release the
documentary on the already set date, due to the
commercial responsibilities and promises of
Prime. Not doing so leads to loss of present and
future work opportunities and irreparable damage
to the reputation of Prime as a content producing
platform.
There are no deadlines in sight for Bhaskar. His
main concern is his reputation at stake. This
becomes the bone of contention because Bhaskar
would either ask for a delay or change in the
content of the documentary. Both the solutions
are devoid of creativity and not a necessity under
the terms of the contract.

[8]
  Mutual Problem-Solving
What could you offer?
Prime shall remain rigid on the point of
immediate release of the documentary but will
propose the following creative and mutually
beneficial options:
1. The Documentary will be divided into three
equal parts and Part 1 will be released
tomorrow. (It provides more viewership for
longer durations and builds anticipation
amongst the viewers)
2. There will be no censorship in Part 1 of the
documentary. (This will keep the audience
interested for the rest of the Parts)
3. There will be a gap of one week in the release
of the next Parts (i.e. Part 2 will be released a
week from now, and Part 3 a week from the
release of Part 2). Some censorship will be
allowed in these parts separately in the range
of 1:90 to 1:60 of the time of the Part.
4. Bhaskar will have a say in the material to be
censored, but his advisory role will not be
altered for the rest of the content.
5. Prime will be open to the idea of future
advertising opportunities with Bhaskar, and
the same will be wonderful for his reputation
as well.
6. Good monetary benefits will be provided to
[9]
What might the opposite party offer?
To stop or delay the release of the film, the other
party may offer the following:
1. Complete mitigation of the losses that Prime
may suffer.
2. A public apology to the effect that the
documentary wasn’t released due to
Bhaskar’s own apprehensions. (However,
such a strong stand will be taken in a very
desperate situation, since it looks bad on the
part of Bhaskar)
3. Dropping of the defamation suit against
Prime.
4. Promise of future endeavours at more
reasonable monetary considerations.
Since the same is not in the best interest of Prime
and cannot be valued highly as per BATNA and
WATNA (Prime believes that if the matter goes
to court, the question of misconstrued elements
may be answered in favour of either party), it will
be rejected by Prime. Thereafter, upon agreement
by both parties to release the documentary
tomorrow, due to no other alternative, the
following can be proposed/asked by Bhaskar, and
will be valued by Prime:
1. That Bhaskar will not have a simple
advisory role, but will have control over
 Bhaskar if aforementioned opportunities are
accepted by him.
7. Bhaskar will mitigate the losses incurred by
Prime due to such changes in the film, to the
extent of the editing, re-shooting, remuneration
to employees, sponsors’ good-will loss. (It can
be offered by decreased royalties as well)
8. Bhaskar will withdraw the Stay Order
application and Defamation Suit against
Prime.
9. Bhaskar will issue a public apology for the
actions
“Always strategize to face someone who is as prepared as you are.”
- The PACT
[10]
the content of the documentary that is
released tomorrow.
2. That certain scenes and elements may be
inserted in the documentary after taking
his due permission.
3. That certain scenes may be added that
may bring repute not just to Bhaskar, but
also to the documentary and is in the best
interest of both the parties.
4. That no extra royalties will be asked for
by Bhaskar.
5. That the Defamation Suit will be dropped
by Bhaskar.
6. That a public apology for the actions of
Bhaskar. (This may be done by him to
sweeten the pot)