New Munich presiding judge advises SEP implementers to carve out Germany from UK license requests, makes other FRAND remarks at ZTE v. Samsung trial

Context: This is a condensed version of the more detailed Context section you can find further below:

• ZTE is enforcing standard-essential patents (SEPs) against Samsung (which retaliated with some of its own patents).
• Samsung responded with countersuits over some of its own patents and FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing) cases in multiple jurisdictions including the UK.
• There have recently been several SEP injunctions by the Munich court’s 7th Civil Chamber (Presiding Judge: Dr. Oliver Schoen (“Schön” in German)), and the court tends to give further FRAND guidance each time.
• The Munich court has another division that hears patent (also including SEP) infringement cases, which is the 21st Civil Chamber. Presiding Judge Dr. Hubertus Schacht took over this month (January 16, 2026 ip fray article).

What’s new: Yesterday (February 13, 2026), Presiding Judge Dr. Schacht held his first SEP trial since returning to the Munich I Regional Court (for his profound SEP expertise, see further below) in a ZTE v. Samsung case. In open court, Judge Schacht stated his panel’s take on FRAND, which included his misgivings about UK FRAND actions covering patent rights enforceable in Germany. While there is no blanket rule according to which the pursuit of a UK interim-license inevitably results in a finding of unwillingness, that is a potential consequence to be decided on a case-by-case basis. The 21st Civil Chamber therefore advises implementers of standards to carve out Germany from their UK FRAND license claims. We will briefly discuss some other high-level FRAND remarks in the first section below the box, which is exclusively reserved for our premium members.

Direct impact:

• Unlike in some other cases, no bench ruling was entered. Samsung was granted leave to elaborate on an invalidity argument. The announcement of the decision has been scheduled for April 15, 2026. In the meantime, there will be various other developments in that dispute. Samsung would be the first implementer to prevail on a FRAND affirmative defense in Munich, so validity is likely the key battlefield.
• A UK Samsung v. ZTE FRAND trial was just held, but those types of rulings take some time. Based on Presiding Judge Dr. Schacht’s generic (not case-specific) remarks, whatever Samsung may obtain in the UK will be counterproductive in Germany. The likelihood of the Munich court being swayed by a UK FRAND rate ruling is practically zero.

Wider ramifications:

• For implementers, carving out Germany from UK FRAND claims is a theoretical but not practical option. The Munich court is the leading SEP injunction forum. And the Unified Patent Court (UPC) is now pushing back forcefully against UK jurisdictional imperialism (February 12, 2026 ip fray article), so anyone carving out Germany would be expected to carve out all of UPCland. Other jurisdictions also have tools at their disposal to protect their cases. ip fray believes that U.S. antisuit injunctions would be reasonably likely to be granted by district courts against extraterritorial overreach involving SEPs regardless of whether SEP holders or implementers are on the receiving end. A Colombian court once entered an anti-antisuit injunction, and the Rio de Janeiro State Court has shown Hisense that certain SEP litigation tactics are not condoned (February 6, 2026 ip fray article).
• The 21st Civil Chamber’s views on FRAND are important because the court randomly assigns patent cases to the 7th or 21st Civil Chamber, except if one division previously dealt with ap atent (and even then the court can assign the case whichever way it wants, though it typically opts for judicial economy).