{"id":1944,"date":"2025-02-28T12:09:13","date_gmt":"2025-02-28T12:09:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ipfray.com\/?p=1944"},"modified":"2025-02-28T12:12:04","modified_gmt":"2025-02-28T12:12:04","slug":"uk-court-of-appeal-declaration-lenovo-is-entitled-to-an-interim-cross-license-with-ericsson","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ipfray.com\/staging1\/uk-court-of-appeal-declaration-lenovo-is-entitled-to-an-interim-cross-license-with-ericsson\/","title":{"rendered":"UK Court of Appeal declaration: Lenovo is entitled to an interim cross-license with Ericsson"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

Context:<\/strong> In November, after approximately a year of litigation, Mr Justice Jonathan Richards of the High Court of Justice for England & Wales (EWHC) denied Lenovo\u2019s request for a declaration that it is entitled to an interim license from Ericsson (November 19, 2024 ip fray<\/strong> article<\/a>). At the time, he was particularly unconvinced of Ericsson seeking injunctions in bad faith, given that a neutral third party \u2013 the U.S. International Trade Commission\u2019s (USITC) Office of Unfair Important Investigations (OUII) \u2013 deems Ericsson to have discharged its FRAND licensing obligation while raising concerns over Lenovo\u2019s demands for a license to its own patents. Lenovo appealed against this ruling and a hearing was held in the England & Wales Court of Appeal (EWCA) last week (February 18, 2025 ip fray<\/strong> article<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What\u2019s new: <\/strong>In a judgment handed down remotely today (PDF below), Lord Justice Newey, Lord Justice Arnold, and Lady Justice Falk of the EWCA revoked the lower court\u2019s decision, siding with Lenovo. They declared that Lenovo is in fact entitled to an interim license and that, in seeking injunctions against the licensee around the globe, Ericsson is in breach of its obligation of good faith FRAND obligations. It is using such tactics to \u201ccoerce\u201d Lenovo to accept terms that may exceed what is FRAND in English courts, they held.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Direct impact: <\/strong>This is not an order for Lenovo and Ericsson to enter into an interim license agreement per se, so it does not formally obligate the licensor to grant a license on any particular terms. But it is still a significant development \u2013 and one that has swung the pendulum back in Lenovo\u2019s favour in its global SEP dispute against Ericsson (in the UK anyway). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wider ramifications: <\/strong>However, as reported earlier this month, there are several ways in which the Unified Patent Court (UPC), German and other national courts could respond to this declaration (and effectively protect their jurisdiction) (February 4, 2025 ip fray<\/strong> article<\/a>). We explore them more in detail in the article, but a decision as massive as this could lead to any (or a combination) of the following responses: ex parte preliminary injunctions against infringement in response to interim license requests; analogous application of anti-antisuit injunctions; sanctions; or non-recognition of forcible licenses and even of withdrawals of complaints.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

This is the full judgment:<\/p>\n\n\n\n