Case Law post CJEU ruling Huawei v ZTE
gb jp cn

Back to main 4iP Council site

Keywords to filter cases
Abuse of market power Adjustment clause Anti-anti-suit injunction Anti-suit injunction Antitrust Claim charts Claim preclusion Comparable agreements Confidentiality Cost-based royalty calculation Country by country licensing Covenant not to sue Cross-licensing Damages Essentiality ETSI declaration Exhaustion Forum conveniens Forum Hunting FRAND behaviour FRAND commitment FRAND declaration FRAND determination FRAND range FRAND rate (calculation) Fulfilment of Huawei obligations in pending proceedings Global Licences Good faith Hold-out Hold-up Huawei framework Huawei obligations Implementer’s counter-offer Implementer’s reaction to offer Injunction Injunctions Jurisdiction Jurisdiction for FRAND disputes License to all v Access to all Non-disclosure agreement Non-discrimination Non-practising entity Non-transitional and transitional cases Notification of infringement Obligations of SEP holder and alleged infringer (Huawei Obligations) Over-declaration Patent ambush Patent exhaustion Patent infringement Patent pools Patent validity Portfolio licensing Preliminary injunction Proportionality Provision of security Recall of products Recognised commercial practice Relevant market Remedy of Huawei obligations in pending proceedings Rendering of accounts Royalty calculation Royalty determination Royalty stacking SEP owner’s offer SSPPU Technical and FRAND-related trials Top-down method Transfer of SEP True FRAND rate Validity Volume discounts Willingness Willingness to obtain a licence Worldwide (portfolio) licenses

Subscribe to be kept updated

 Keep updated

Subscribe to be kept updated

*

Background

The summaries in this area of the website relate to court decisions rendered after the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU or ECJ) handed down its ruling in case C170/13 Huawei v ZTE on 16 July 2015. (The Huawei Case)

The summaries focus on the core issue raised by the Huawei decision, namely the conditions under which a standard essential patent holder may seek injunctive relief for infringement of his patents or where a standard implementer can raise a competition law-based defense to an action brought by a SEP holder. Occasionally, related and additional aspects of a decision are included into the summary because of their importance for understanding the context of FRAND licensing. In general, though, non-Huawei-related issues are omitted, such as, for instance, general procedural or patent law aspects (venue, patent description, validity, infringement, etc.).

With regard to the jurisdictions covered, the primary goal is to map the German situation but, depending on their accessibility, some decisions from other EU Member States are included, too.

Table of Cases