Nation Media Group has lost its bid to stop enforcement of a KSh320 million award owed to Al Is On Production, the company behind the television drama Mali.
The High Court dismissed the broadcaster’s application to set aside the award, closing an eleven year dispute over advertising revenue from the series.
Court Clears Path For Payout
Justice Francis Gikonyo delivered the ruling on July 2, 2026 at Milimani Law Courts in the case Nation Media Group Limited v Al Is On Production Limited, Arbitration Cause E049 of 2025. He dismissed Nation Media’s application under section 35 of the Arbitration Act for lack of merit and granted Al Is On Production’s parallel application under section 36 to have the award recognised and enforced as a judgment of the court. Neither side was ordered to pay costs on either application. Nation Media can still appeal, but enforcement may now proceed.
A Partnership That Turned Into A Dispute
The two parties signed a production agreement on May 19, 2011, then varied its terms through a deed dated February 20, 2012. Under that deal, Al Is On Production made 295 episodes of Mali, each running 24 minutes with an additional 6 minutes reserved for commercial airtime, for broadcast on NTV Kenya, NTV Uganda and the now closed QTV. Nation Media held exclusive control over procuring, placing and broadcasting advertisements during the show, subject to an agreed rate card.
Where The Numbers Stopped Adding Up
Al Is On Production grew concerned when it noticed advertisements running during broadcasts that never showed up in the revenue reports Nation Media supplied. Those reports covered the period from May 2013 but reflected only sponsorship income from Nivea.
The producer, Alison Ngibuini, commissioned Ipsos Limited and Reelforge Systems Limited to independently assess advertising expenditure by Nation Media’s clients between 2013 and 2016. Both firms found figures that diverged sharply from what the broadcaster had disclosed. When a demand letter dated August 5, 2014 went unanswered, and later talks toward an amicable settlement stalled, the dispute moved to arbitration under clause 11.2 of the agreement.
Inside The Arbitration
The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators Kenya Branch appointed Allen Waiyaki Gichuhi as sole arbitrator on October 16, 2015. On June 28, 2017, he issued a peremptory order directing Nation Media to produce reconciliation logs and invoices covering 2011 to 2016 and to render a full account of payments made to Al Is On Production. By late 2019, the parties agreed by consent to bring in an independent expert, Kuria Muchiru, to audit and verify every advertising spot that aired during the series across all three stations. Muchiru filed multiple reports and was cross-examined before the arbitrator issued his final award on March 21, 2025, released to the parties that May once tribunal fees were settled.
The arbitrator found that Nation Media had breached the agreement by failing to hand over revenue records despite repeated orders, and drew what the law calls an adverse inference from that failure. In his award he noted that Nation Media had exclusive control over broadcasting the series, including decisions on broadcast days, time allocation, content type and advertisement duration, so any discrepancy in commercial airtime fell solely within its control. He also pointed out that Nation Media’s own witness admitted the series was co-owned in equal shares by both parties, which meant dealings around it should have been mutually agreed. On the missing records, the arbitrator wrote plainly that Nation Media never complied with the interim awards requiring it to produce evidence of the revenue it earned from commercial airtime.
Nation Media tried to argue it only had to keep programme logs for one year under section 461 of the Kenya Information and Communications Act. The arbitrator rejected that defence, reasoning that the law’s definition of a programme covers sound and vision content like Mali itself, not the commercial airtime tied to revenue. He instead applied the six year limitation period for breach of contract under the Limitation of Actions Act and noted that the VAT Act requires five years of transaction records in any case.
The award, which totalled roughly KSh320 million, broke down as follows:
- KSh160.55 million in revenue owed, with simple interest at 12 percent from July 18, 2019 until paid in full
- KSh25.32 million for the independent assessors’ costs, with simple interest at 14 percent if unpaid within 30 days
- KSh4.38 million for arbitration costs, with the same 14 percent penalty interest
- KSh4.55 million in taxed party and party costs, also carrying 14 percent interest if delayed
The arbitrator dismissed claims for aggravated, exemplary and punitive damages.
Nation Media’s Challenge Falls Flat
Nation Media asked the High Court to set aside the award on four grounds: that the arbitrator lacked evenhandedness in how he handled the independent expert’s reports, that he considered Al Is On Production’s case but rejected Nation Media’s without meaningful reasons, that the award breached public policy by ignoring relevant evidence, and that it violated the constitutional right to a fair hearing under Article 50.
Justice Gikonyo worked through each ground against the text of the final award. He found that the arbitrator had documented both sides’ submissions, identified the issues for determination, and given clear reasons for his conclusions, quoting the arbitrator’s own finding that Nation Media’s failure to disclose revenue information stood even though its witness admitted joint ownership of the series. On the fairness complaint, the judge held that the arbitrator considered both parties’ cases, the available evidence and the applicable law.
On the claim that the arbitrator lacked impartiality, the judge noted a procedural gap. Under section 14 of the Arbitration Act, a party must challenge an arbitrator’s impartiality within 15 days of becoming aware of the relevant circumstances. Nation Media never raised such a challenge during the proceedings, which the judge said undermined the ground significantly at this late stage.
The ruling also set out the constitutional backdrop for the decision. Article 159(2)(c) of the Constitution requires courts to promote arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms rather than second guess them, and section 10 of the Arbitration Act bars court intervention except where the law expressly allows it. Drawing on the earlier authority Mahican Investments Limited and 3 others v Giovanni Gaida & Others, the judge stressed that stepping beyond those narrow grounds would turn the High Court into a de facto court of appeal, which the Arbitration Act is designed to prevent.
Finding that Nation Media had failed to demonstrate any breach of procedural fairness or any conflict with public policy under section 35(2) of the Arbitration Act, Justice Gikonyo dismissed its application in full. He then granted Al Is On Production’s section 36 application, holding that the company had met every requirement for recognition and enforcement by producing the arbitration agreement and the final award, while Nation Media had shown no ground under section 37 for refusing enforcement.
The ruling now clears Al Is On Production to pursue the full KSh320 million award as a judgment of the court, unless Nation Media secures relief on appeal.
