DUBAI: A month after the ICC Disputes Resolutions Committee rejected a $70 million damages claim the PCB brought against the BCCI for not fulfilling the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the two boards in 2014, the cash strapped Pakistan Cricket Board has been hit with the proverbial knockout punch.
The BCCI had moved the same committee that had rejected PCB’s original damages to recover legal costs it had incurred while presenting its case before the panel.
The ICC on Wednesday announced on behalf of the panel that the PCB would have to pay the BCCI 60% of its legal costs as well as 60% of the costs the ICC bore in hearing the case. Read that as the administrative costs and expenses of the panel (headed by Michael Beloff, an English barrister and a member of Blackstone Chambers, that also included Jan Paulsson and Annabelle Bennett).
While announcing the panel’s decision, cricket’s world governing body stated that “the figure whereof (BCCI costs + administrative costs) is to be supplied to the PCB by the ICC”.
And how much would that be? “In the hundreds of thousands of dollars is the closest one can get to any worthwhile estimate”, is what a top sports lawyer told SportzPower.
In its official reation to the panel’s decision, the Pakistan board observed: “The PCB notes the ICC Dispute Panel’s decision on BCCI’s claims for their legal expense incurred on the PCB-BCCI dispute. The award of significantly lesser costs than claimed by BCCI reflects that PCB’s case had merits. The PCB, however, reiterates its disappointment in the original decision/award given against it.”
For the record, in the hearings that took place between October 1 to 3 at the ICC headquarters here, the PCB had claimed damages to the tune of $70 million from BCCI for not fulfilling the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the two boards in 2014 to play six bilateral series against each other over the period of eight years between 2015 and 2023. The issue arose over the BCCI’s refusal to play any bilateral cricket involving Pakistan as a consequence of the Centre’s refusal to play ball on the matter in the light of the strained political relations between the government’s of the two traditional cricketing rivals.
As for the judgment, it is binding and non-appealable and can be found here…
ICC’s previous media release on this matter can be found here, while the first judgment is available here…
The terms of reference of the DRC can be found here…
