20. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Commitments

a) Programming Rights Agreements and Other Commitments

At March 31, 2018, we had total commitments of US$ 87.8 million (December 31, 2017: US$ 99.1 million) in respect of future programming, including contracts signed with license periods starting after the balance sheet date. In addition, we have digital transmission obligations, future minimum operating lease payments for non-cancellable operating leases with remaining terms in excess of one year (net of any sublease income) and other commitments as follows:



	Programming purchase obligations		Other commitments ⁽¹⁾		Operating leases		Capital expenditures
2018	$	24,663	$	13,232	$	2,264	$	1,411
2019	24,536		12,049		848		218
2020	18,530		2,224		443		—
2021	12,984		148		365		—
2022	3,312		125		356		—
2023 and thereafter	3,773		42		1,782		—
Total	$	87,798	$	27,820	$	6,058	$	1,629


⁽¹⁾	Other commitments are primarily comprised of digital transmission commitments.

Contingencies

Litigation

We are from time to time party to legal proceedings, arbitrations and regulatory proceedings arising in the normal course of our business operations, including the proceeding described below. We evaluate, on a quarterly basis, developments in such matters and provide accruals for such matters, as appropriate. In making such decisions, we consider the degree of probability of an unfavorable outcome and our ability to make a reasonable estimate of the amount of a loss. An unfavorable outcome in any such proceedings, if material, could have an adverse effect on our business or consolidated financial statements.

In the fourth quarter of 2016, our Slovak subsidiary MARKIZA-SLOVAKIA, spol. s.r.o. (“Markiza”) was notified of claims that were filed in June 2016 in a court of first instance in Bratislava, the Slovak Republic to collect amounts allegedly owing under four promissory notes. These four promissory notes were purportedly issued in June 2000 by Pavol Rusko in his personal capacity and were purportedly guaranteed by Markiza under the signature of Mr. Rusko, who was an executive director of Markiza at that time as well as one of its shareholders. The notes purport to be issued in favor of Marian Kocner, a controversial Slovak businessman, and to a former associate of Mr. Kocner, and were supposedly assigned several times, ultimately to Sprava a inkaso zmeniek, s.r.o., a company owned by Mr. Kocner that is the plaintiff in these proceedings. Two of the notes allegedly matured in 2015 and the other two in 2016. The four notes purport to be in the aggregate amount of approximately EUR 69.0 million and accrue interest from their purported maturity dates.

Despite a random case assignment system in the Slovak Republic, claims in respect of three of the notes were initially assigned to the same judge. The judge who was assigned the claim in respect of the fourth promissory note (in the amount of approximately EUR 26.2 million) terminated proceedings in January 2017 because the plaintiff failed to pay court fees. The plaintiff refiled this claim in June 2017; the judge who was assigned the refiled claim terminated proceedings in September after the plaintiff again failed to pay court fees. In responses to the claims in respect of the other three promissory notes that were filed in August 2017 and in his testimony, Mr. Rusko asserted that he signed the three notes in June 2000. We do not believe that the notes were signed in June 2000 or that any of the notes are authentic. Although proceedings have commenced in respect of all three notes, the number of hearings that may be held in respect of any of the notes and over what time period is unknown. We are vigorously defending the claims.