In the world of disagreements, not finding a solution is like starting a journey without directions. PrivateCourt is your guide, making sure every problem finds a way to an amicable RESOLUTION!

Private Court Symbol
The International Court of ARBITRATION


Got any

Write to us

Share this page

Digital Marketing Company V. DIgital Marketing Company

Date of Claim raised: 20/12/2022
Date of Conciliation: 21/12/2022
Date of Settlement: 21/12/2022
Digest: Mediation/Conciliation/Dispute/Claimant/Respondent/Invoice/Settlement
Case Summary

In a scenario that unfolded between an Enterprise Messaging & Digital Marketing company based in Bangalore (the Claimant) and a data-driven digital marketing agency located in Pune (the Respondent), a dispute arose over the non-payment of a significant amount. The Claimant had provided reliable, quality, and cost-effective services in the areas of messaging, voice solutions, digital marketing, software, and application development. Despite fulfilling their obligations, the Respondent failed to remit the disputed amount of Rs. 6,80,000/-.

With expertise in legal matters and a commitment to impartiality, PrivateCourt was chosen as the conciliator to help settle the case and find a mutually agreeable solution.

The Issue:

The dispute arose from the Claimant's provision of comprehensive messaging, voice solutions, digital marketing, and software/application development services to the Respondent. The Claimant had successfully executed their responsibilities, ensuring a strong digital presence for the Respondent's brand while focusing on data and return on investment (ROI).

However, the Respondent failed to make the agreed payment of Rs. 6,80,000/-, citing alleged dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the services provided.

The Claimant argued that they had adhered to the agreed terms and delivered services as promised. They highlighted their expertise in messaging, media, and technology, showcasing their commitment to quality and meeting the latest industry trends. The Claimant firmly believed that the Respondent's non-payment was unjustified and sought the full settlement of the outstanding amount.

The Respondent, on the other hand, contended that the Claimant had not fulfilled the agreed-upon deliverables and had not met their expectations. They claimed that the services provided were subpar and did not yield the expected results. As a result, the Respondent refused to make the payment until the disputed issues were resolved.

In addition to the non-payment of the disputed amount, there were three additional reasons that contributed to the dispute:

  • Lack of Communication: The Claimant alleged that the Respondent consistently displayed a lack of effective communication throughout the project. They claimed that the Respondent failed to provide timely updates on the progress of the digital marketing campaign, did not respond promptly to queries and concerns raised by the Claimant, and did not collaborate effectively to ensure that the project was on track. This breakdown in communication led to misunderstandings and frustration between the parties, ultimately contributing to the dispute.
  • Performance and Results: The Respondent, on the other hand, argued that the Claimant's performance and the results delivered fell short of their expectations. They claimed that the messaging, voice solutions, and digital marketing services provided by the Claimant did not achieve the desired outcomes, such as increased brand visibility, lead generation, and return on investment. The Respondent believed that the Claimant's failure to meet the agreed-upon performance standards and deliver satisfactory results justified their decision to withhold payment.
  • Contractual Discrepancies: Both parties had differing interpretations of the terms and conditions outlined in their contractual agreement. The Claimant asserted that the payment terms and milestones were clearly defined, and they had fulfilled all the requirements as per the agreed-upon schedule. Conversely, the Respondent argued that certain contractual obligations were not met by the Claimant, such as the delivery of specific software and application development services, which impacted the overall effectiveness of the digital marketing campaign. These discrepancies in understanding the contractual obligations added to the complexity of the dispute.

Given the combination of non-payment, lack of communication, performance and results concerns, and contractual discrepancies, the dispute escalated to the point where the parties sought the assistance of PrivateCourt.

Both parties had exhausted their efforts to reach an amicable settlement, leading them to approach PrivateCourt for resolution.

The PrivateCourt Proceedings:

Upon receiving the case, the PrivateCourt team acted diligently, requesting relevant documents from both parties to gain a comprehensive understanding of the dispute. The team meticulously vetted the provided materials, ensuring a fair assessment of the situation and adherence to established protocols.

The lead sole conciliator from PrivateCourt scheduled a conciliation session via Zoom and audio conference calls as per the Notice of Conciliation. However, before the scheduled proceedings, the Respondent engaged in a discussion with the PrivateCourt team.

During this discussion, the Respondent expressed their desire to settle the issues by paying the entire disputed amount, acknowledging their obligation to the Claimant.

Impressed by the professionalism and unbiased approach of the PrivateCourt team, the Respondent opted for a swift resolution, recognizing the value of resolving the matter promptly and preserving their business relationship with the Claimant.

The Settlement Agreement:

In light of the Respondent's decision to pay the entire claim amount, a settlement agreement was drafted by the PrivateCourt team. The settlement agreement stated that the Respondent, agreed to pay the disputed amount of Rs. 6,80,000/- as the full and final outstanding payment to the Claimant on or before on 28th December 2022,

To ensure future disputes could be resolved efficiently and fairly, the settlement agreement also included a provision stipulating that any claims or disputes arising from the agreement would be subject to e-arbitration conducted according to the rules of PrivateCourt. This would enable the parties to address any potential conflicts in a streamlined and legally binding manner, with the assistance of PrivateCourt's expert arbitration services.

The Inference:

PrivateCourt's intervention provided an opportunity for the parties to engage in constructive dialogue and resolve the issues that had strained their business relationship. The quick resolution of the dispute highlights the effectiveness of PrivateCourt's services in facilitating fair outcomes and preserving business relationships between parties involved in such disputes.