Tesla, Inc and another (Appellants) v InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc and others (Respondents)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0058

Parties

Appellant(s)

Tesla, Inc. and Tesla Motors Ltd

Respondent(s)

InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc and InterDigital Holdings, Inc

Avanci Vehicle, LLC (formerly Avanci, LLC)

Intervener(s)

Fair Standards Alliance (FSA)

ACT | The App Association

Motion Picture Association, Inc

Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA)

International Center for Law & Economics

Issue

Do the courts of England and Wales have jurisdiction to determine, at the request of an implementer, what terms are fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) for a licence to patents which have been declared as essential to a technological standard (called “SEPs”) where the relevant licence is offered by an intermediary as part of a pool or platform of SEPs?

Facts

InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc and InterDigital Holdings, Inc (collectively “InterDigital”) are members of the InterDigital Group, which develops and licenses wireless communications technology. The InterDigital Group owns a portfolio of patents declared as SEPs to the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (“ETSI”) 2G, 3G, 4G and 5G standards (the “ETSI Standards”). Avanci, LLC (“Avanci”) administers patent platforms which many SEP owners have signed up to. By paying a single fee, an implementer would be granted a ‘platform licence’ by Avanci, acting as the SEP owners agent, which allows the implementer to use all of the SEPs which are included in the platform without having to negotiate individual licences with each of the SEP owners separately. One of Avanci’s platforms concerns SEPs declared as essential to the ETSI Standards for use in 5G-enabled vehicles (the “Avanci 5G Platform”). InterDigital is one of the SEP owners who have signed up to the Avanci 5G Platform. Tesla, Inc and Tesla Motors Ltd (“Tesla”) wish to launch 5G enabled vehicles in the UK. All of the SEPs in the Avanci 5G Platform are subject to undertakings given to ETSI which oblige their owners to offer licenses of those SEPs to implementers on FRAND terms. Outside of a modest set of approved possible modifications, Avanci cannot vary the platform licence for the Avanci 5G Platform without the consent of the members of the Avanci 5G Platform. Tesla’s position is that the rate set by Avanci to the platform licence, costing at the time of proceedings $32 per vehicle, is not FRAND. In December 2023, Tesla raised proceedings seeking declarations including as to what would be FRAND terms for a license of the UK SEPs of InterDigital on the Avanci 5G Platform. The claim was raised against Avanci as the operator of the Avanci 5G Platform and InterDigital, as one of the Avanci 5G Platform members that has given a FRAND commitment to ETSI. Whilst arguing that the FRAND commitment to ETSI does not apply to such licensing platforms, the jurisdiction of the English courts was challenged arguing that the Delaware Court of Chancery was the more appropriate forum to resolve the dispute and that permission to serve the claim outside of jurisdiction should be refused or that any served claim in jurisdiction should be stayed. The High Court set aside service of the claim form in respect of certain claims. Tesla appealed to the Court of Appeal and InterDigital cross appealed. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal by majority, with Arnold LJ dissenting. Tesla now appeals to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

4 April 2025

Case origin

PTA

Judgment appealed

Written arguments

Statements of Facts and Issues

Linked cases

Judgment details

Judgment date

27 July 2026

Neutral citation

[2026] UKSC 27

Appeal

Justices

Lord Sales

Lord Briggs

Lord Hamblen

Lord Burrows

Lord Kitchin

Hearing dates

Full hearing

Start date

27 April 2026

End date

29 April 2026

Watch hearings

Permission to Appeal

Justices

Lord Briggs

Lord Leggatt

Lord Burrows

Permission to Appeal decision date

1 July 2025

Permission to Appeal decision

Granted in part

Back to top