{"id":2450,"date":"2026-03-17T09:58:39","date_gmt":"2026-03-17T09:58:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/2026\/03\/17\/exclusive-cybersecurity-firm-ec-council-sues-wpp-over-alleged-non-delivery-of-6-3-mn-revenue-commitment-bestmediainfo-com\/"},"modified":"2026-03-17T22:34:20","modified_gmt":"2026-03-17T22:34:20","slug":"exclusive-cybersecurity-firm-ec-council-sues-wpp-over-alleged-non-delivery-of-6-3-mn-revenue-commitment-bestmediainfo-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/2026\/03\/17\/exclusive-cybersecurity-firm-ec-council-sues-wpp-over-alleged-non-delivery-of-6-3-mn-revenue-commitment-bestmediainfo-com\/","title":{"rendered":"Exclusive: Cybersecurity firm EC-Council sues WPP over alleged non-delivery of $6.3 mn revenue commitment – bestmediainfo.com"},"content":{"rendered":"

0
By clicking the button, I accept the Terms of Use of the service<\/a> and its Privacy Policy<\/a>, as well as consent to the processing of personal data.
Don\u2019t have an account? Signup<\/a>
Powered by : <\/path><\/path><\/svg><\/a><\/span>
Follow Us
New Delhi: Cybersecurity certification company EC-Council has sued WPP in Singapore, alleging that the AKQA failed to deliver an incremental revenue commitment of about US$6.3 million under a 2024 strategic marketing and advertising mandate. WPP has counterclaimed for unpaid invoices of US$2.5 million.
WPP’s AKQA, however, said the dispute centres on unpaid invoices and maintained that it had met all contractual obligations.
EC-Council alleged that WPP and its affiliated entities generated zero incremental revenue in Quarters 2 and 3 of 2024, and later WPP indicated that the revenue expected for the rest of the year would be lower than the sums specified in the contract. 
WPP’s AKQA, in its defense, denied that this amounted to a simple breach and said the US$6.3 million figure was a projected number in a pitch, with the agreement itself providing for fee adjustments if targets were missed.
In a call with BestMediaInfo, an EC-Council spokesperson said WPP won the business through a pitch in which the presentation materials were central to what was being promised.
“Absolutely. There was a competitive pitch process. From our perspective, the commitments outlined in their presentation were not aspirational talking points. They formed the basis on which we selected WPP over other vendors, and they were subsequently formalised in a binding agreement,” said the spokesperson.
The spokesperson added that management was drawn to WPP’s offer because, in EC-Council’s view, no other vendor was prepared to commit incremental revenue in the same way. AKQA disputes this interpretation of the contract.
AKQA’s defense, however, said the number in question was a projected figure rather than a straightforward guarantee.
An AKQA spokesperson said, “AKQA’s engagement with EC-Council in May 2024 for specific services involved a commercial arrangement structured specifically for this relationship. The main dispute revolves around EC-Council’s failure to pay overdue invoices. EC-Council filed preemptive legal action in Singapore only after AKQA began pursuing this debt. AKQA met all contractual obligations, and we will robustly defend these proceedings and are confident the claims against AKQA will not succeed.”
However, EC-Council challenged this narrative as disingenuous and false. EC-Council said it terminated its contract with WPP over WPP’s gross underperformance and was seeking to claim damages for repudiatory\/anticipatory breach subsequently; hence, its Singapore suit. 
“Betraying its lack of conviction, WPP only filed a counterclaim (not a claim) in respect of its purported claim for unpaid invoices,” stated the EC Council.
EC-Council and WPP entered into an agreement dated April 30, 2024, under which WPP, acting on behalf of affiliated entities including AKQA Pty Ltd, M Media Group Pty Ltd, and Burson Cohn & Wolfe LLC, was to provide strategic marketing and advertising services from May 1 to December 31, 2024.
The filings state that a sales presentation outlined how WPP’s team would achieve “$6.3 million incremental revenue growth in 2024,” while the agreement set out a total incremental revenue commitment of US$6,265,555, or about US$6.3 million, at a 1.31x ROI multiple.
EC-Council has alleged that zero incremental revenue was generated in Quarters 2 and 3 of 2024. The claim further said that, in August 2024 and before September, WPP representatives told EC-Council they would deliver lower incremental revenue for the rest of the year than the sums specified in the contract.
WPP’s defence contested that account on both principle and process. It said the presentation was “a pitch presentation” and that the “$6.3 million incremental revenue growth” figure was “a projected figure” that included “pending further validation of whether the target was realistic.”
WPP also said the ROI model was built on “2023 data supplied” by EC-Council and assumptions, including that 2024 revenue was growing 15.56% over 2023, with the WPP entities’ programme expected to improve lead-to-sales conversion.
On liability, WPP entities argued that the agreement already provided for underperformance through a downward fee adjustment and ROI penalty. “In any scenario,” it said, agency fees, adjusted under the contract, “would be payable” to the WPP entities.
The fight also goes back to the growth modelling done before the contract was signed. Court filings show EC-Council separately engaged WPP in April 2024 for US$22,235 to build an ROI model and estimate incremental revenue for the rest of the year.
On this point, WPP said the final model, shared on 30 April using EC-Council’s 2023 data, assumed 2024 revenue growth of 15.56% year on year. EC-Council, however, said the final model underlying the revenue commitment assumed 9% growth year on year. In short, even the math behind the deal is being contested.
The dispute is not limited to revenue. EC-Council alleged that the WPP entities’ delays and defective deliverables hurt the CEH v13 (EC-Council’s flagship cybersecurity certification) launch. It said WPP entities knew the product was scheduled to launch on or before September 10, 2024, but the full launch slipped to September 23, and the pre-launch moved to September 10 because the WPP entities did not perform their obligations in time.
EC-Council further said that it developed the webpages on its own and deployed them for the pre-launch and later developed the webpages for the US market launch before WPP entities’ packages arrived.
AKQA denied all of the allegations of delays and defective deliverables, noting, among other things, that any failure to meet timelines and\/or to deliver services and products as alleged by ECC was either with the knowledge and consent of ECC and\/or materially due to ECC’s own acts, omissions, and\/or change of instructions and priorities. 
AKQA further stated that ECC commenced the action for the purpose of pre-empting a claim by WPP for fees properly owed by ECC to the WPP entities.
In the call with BestMediaInfo, the EC-Council spokesperson said the matter should not be seen only as a delivery dispute. “Zero transformation. Zero incremental revenue. Zero accountability. That is what a consortium of WPP agencies delivered against a binding commitment of US$6.3 million. This case is not simply about a revenue shortfall, but, as ECC alleges, it is about a systematic failure to meet the obligations that were prerequisite to generating that revenue,” the spokesperson said. 
At the same time, the spokesperson maintained that the arrangement went beyond the usual best-efforts pitch. “Agencies can tell them that we can help you get it, but they cannot guarantee it,” the spokesperson said. “But this one,” the entire consortium said, “we will deliver for you.” 
WPP’s defence disputes that reading, saying the target was a mere projection based upon data and assumptions provided by ECC and further that the contract already contemplated underperformance through fee adjustments and an ROI penalty.
On the CEH v13 delays, WPP said EC-Council itself hindered delivery by delaying instructions on the pre-launch, changing instructions on having a pre-launch offer, withholding timely approval on a creative approach, and delaying access needed for webpage development.
AKQA also said seven of the eight SOWs were signed only on 31 May 2024, that the scope expanded through change requests, and that some long-term transformation work was later parked so teams could focus on the US$6.3 million target.
The defence also argued that some disputed deliverables were not originally in scope. In the defence, WPP said the CEH Change Request expressly noted that “the delivery of the CEH v13 product had not been included in scope” earlier, and that under the brochure change request, it was responsible only for design, with brochure content to be supplied by EC-Council.
The financial fight has widened, too. WPP said EC-Council wrongfully terminated the agreement on 22 October 2024, that WPP accepted that repudiation on 28 November 2024, and that it is pursuing unpaid invoices of roughly US$2.03 million along with other damages.
EC-Council denied owing that amount and said it is entitled to set off damages against WPP’s counterclaim.
On settlement, the EC-Council spokesperson indicated that the company is not closed to a resolution outside court, but said earlier negotiation and mediation attempts had failed. “We pursued mediation in good faith and remain open to a resolution outside the courts. Unfortunately, those efforts did not produce an outcome that, in our view, reflected the scale of the commitment that was made to us and subsequently broken,” the spokesperson told BestMediaInfo.com.
EC-Council said it “denies that it owes WPP and\/or the WPP Entities US$2,025,879.98” and added that it “was, and remains, entitled to set off such amounts in damages” against WPP’s counterclaim.<\/p>\n

Subscribe to our Newsletter!<\/p>\n

Share this article
If you liked this article share it with your friends.
they will thank you later <\/p>\n

source<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

0By clicking the button, I accept the Terms of Use of the service and its Privacy Policy, as well as consent to the processing of personal data.Don\u2019t have an account? Signup Powered by : Follow UsNew Delhi: Cybersecurity certification company EC-Council has sued WPP in Singapore, alleging that the AKQA failed to deliver an incremental […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2451,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,3],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-2450","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"category-world"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2450","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2450"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2450\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2500,"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2450\/revisions\/2500"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2451"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2450"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2450"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2450"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}