



Mint Explainer: Why celebrities can no longer use insolvency law to recover dues from brands
Subscribe to enjoy similar stories. Can a celebrity use India’s insolvency courts to recover unpaid appearance or endorsement fees? A ruling by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on 6 February ruled 'no' on this question, providing much-needed clarity on how payment disputes in brand contracts should be legally handled. The issue came into focus after Bollywood actor Akshay Kumar Bhatia approached an insolvency court to recover dues from Cue Learn, an edtech company.
The case raised important questions about whether the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) can be used as a debt-recovery tool in commercial endorsement disputes. Mint explains the NCLAT ruling and its long-term impact on celebrity brand contracts. The case arose from an endorsement agreement signed in March 2021 between Akshay Kumar and Cue Learn.
Under the deal, Kumar agreed to provide promotional services for up to two days over a two-year period ending March 2023. The total fee was ₹8.10 crore plus taxes, payable in two instalments. Cue Learn paid the first ₹4.05 crore in March 2021, and the actor’s services were used for one day.
The second instalment of ₹4.05 crore was due by April 2022. However, since the second day was never scheduled, the company did not make the second payment. In April 2022, Kumar raised an invoice for the balance amount.
After receiving no response, he issued a demand notice under the IBC in May 2022. Cue Learn replied that the second payment was linked to the use of his services for another day and since no such day was scheduled, no payment obligation arose. In June 2022, Kumar filed a petition under Section 9 of the IBC.
Read on livemint.com