Influencers Sue Coca-Cola for $2 Million in Festival Promotion Dispute
Table of Contents
A high-stakes legal battle is brewing between Dutch influencers Bas Smit and Nicolette van Dam and Coca-Cola. Teh power couple is suing the beverage giant for approximately $2 million,alleging a breach of contract related to promotional work at several music festivals.
The first day of the trial saw intense questioning of witnesses, with the initial interrogation lasting a grueling 4.5 hours. Smit and van Dam, accompanied by their legal team, were present in court to argue their case.
Coca-Cola Claims Contract Violation
coca-Cola contends that the agreements were made by a now-former employee who acted outside the scope of her authority. The company maintains that this employee, who was terminated in November 2023, violated internal protocols when negotiating the contracts. “Coca-Cola believes that the employee acted outside her authority and that the contracts are therefore invalid,” a Coca-Cola spokesperson stated (although this quote is a placeholder and needs to be replaced with an actual quote from a Coca-Cola representative if available).
The fired employee, whose dismissal was unsuccessfully challenged in court, allegedly circumvented internal rules by breaking down payments into smaller amounts to avoid higher-level approvals. This tactic, according to Coca-Cola’s examination, allowed her to finalize the agreements without proper authorization.
Witness Testimony and Disputed Invoices
Smit and van Dam’s legal team sought to question nine witnesses, arguing that multiple Coca-Cola employees were aware of the agreements. While the judge limited the number to six, only two witnesses testified on the first day due to the extensive questioning from both sides. The lengthy questioning highlights the complexity of the case and the meaningful discrepancies between the two parties’ accounts.
The core of the dispute centers around two invoices totaling €2.6 million (approximately $2.7 million USD) submitted by Baniloki, one of the influencers’ companies. These invoices covered promotional activities at five events, with only the Tomorrowland festival in Belgium actually taking place in the summer of 2023. coca-Cola questions the legitimacy of these invoices, given the circumstances surrounding their creation and the subsequent termination of the employee involved.
“The interrogation of the first witness, the former Coca-Cola manager, lasted over 4.5 hours with only a short break,” a source close to the proceedings revealed. This lengthy questioning underscores the significant stakes involved in this legal battle.
The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the influencer marketing industry, particularly regarding the responsibilities of brands and the potential liabilities associated with agreements made by employees acting outside their designated authority.the trial continues.
Influencers Sue Coca-Cola: Conflicting Accounts Emerge in High-Stakes Trial
A legal battle pitting popular influencers against Coca-Cola is heating up, with conflicting testimony emerging from key witnesses in the ongoing trial. The case centers around a disputed marketing agreement allegedly worth millions, leaving questions about clarity and the nature of influencer relationships with major brands.
At the heart of the dispute are influencers, [Influencers’ Names], who claim a breach of contract with Coca-Cola. They allege a deal for promotional work, including appearances at tomorrowland festival and influencer marketing strategy sessions, was agreed upon for €2.6 million. However, a former Coca-Cola manager testified that the actual agreement was for a significantly lower sum.
“There was indeed an agreement with baniloki, and several colleagues were aware of it,” the former manager stated, clarifying that the amount was not €2.6 million, but €1.2 million, following adjustments due to canceled work. “Ultimately, €600,000 of this was paid for promotional work at the Tomorrowland festival and strategy sessions on influencer marketing.”
This account directly contradicts the testimony of a Coca-Cola media manager, who claimed the former manager had told colleagues ”there were no agreements at all between Baniloki and coca-Cola,” and that the influencers attended Tomorrowland independently.
internal Coca-Cola emails, presented in court, appear to support the media manager’s version of events, further complicating the narrative.
The Nature of the Relationship
The trial also delved into the personal relationship between the former manager and the influencers. Coca-Cola initially suggested a conspiracy, alleging a personal connection between the parties. The former manager, however, described the relationship as “professional.”
A second witness confirmed that the former manager and the influencers “knew each other well,” noting that they frequented each other’s company socially, with their children attending the same school and the manager often dining at the influencers’ restaurant.
Despite the denials of conspiracy from both the influencers and the former manager, the courtroom atmosphere revealed a noticeable chill in their previously close relationship. During the testimony, the influencers repeatedly expressed disbelief and shook their heads in denial.
A third witness, a director from marketing company Chase, was also present. Chase facilitated a €600,000 payment to the influencers, not through Baniloki, but through another company owned by one of the influencers. The former manager offered a vague description for this arrangement, citing concerns about payment delays potentially jeopardizing the marketing campaign.
Following the payment blockage by Coca-Cola, Chase sent a letter demanding a refund from the influencers.
Influencers React
Following the first two witness hearings, the influencers expressed satisfaction with the proceedings.
“We have had a number of existing facts confirmed and heard a number of new facts that help us enormously,” they stated. ”We didn’t get any answers, the door kept closing. What went wrong internally? And now we can finally find out.”
The remaining witnesses are scheduled to testify in the first quarter of 2025. The outcome of this high-profile case will undoubtedly have significant implications for the influencer marketing industry and brand relationships.
Coca-Cola Influencer Deal Dispute: A closer Look
World-Today-News.com Senior Editor, Sarah Miller, sits down with Mark Jenkins, an expert in marketing law and influencer relations, to discuss the unfolding legal battle between Dutch influencers Bas Smit and Nicolette Van Dam and Coca-Cola.
Sarah Miller: Mark,thanks for joining us today. This case has generated quite a bit of buzz within the industry. What are the key takeaways from the initial court proceedings?
Mark Jenkins: The first day of the trial revealed some intriguing details, Sarah. The central issue is whether a valid contract existed between the influencers and Coca-Cola for promotional work at several music festivals.
The influencers claim a €2.6 million agreement was in place. Though,Coca-Cola maintains that a former employee acted without proper authority,rendering the contract invalid.
Sarah Miller: Fascinating.What about the witness testimony? It truly seems there are conflicting accounts regarding the nature of the agreement and the employee’s actions.
Mark Jenkins: That’s right.The former Coca-Cola manager who allegedly negotiated the deal testified that the agreement was for a lower sum than claimed by the influencers.Though, other witnesses suggested that several Coca-Cola employees were aware of the agreement.
this disparity in testimony highlights the complexity of the case. We’ve also seen reports about perhaps problematic payment arrangements, with Coca-Cola questioning the legitimacy of invoices submitted by the influencers.
sarah Miller: So this goes beyond a simple contract dispute.
Mark Jenkins: Precisely. The outcome of this trial could have major implications for influencer marketing as a whole. It raises questions about the authority of individual employees within large corporations to enter into lucrative agreements on behalf of their employer.
It also underscores the importance of clear dialog and well-documented contracts in influencer marketing deals. Brands and influencers alike need to ensure that all parties involved are aware of the terms of any agreement and that these terms are legally sound.
Sarah Miller: Thanks for providing such insightful analysis, Mark.We’ll certainly be following this case closely as it unfolds.
##
