No
jurisdiction to hear patent licensing competition claim against Philips
The
High Court has upheld applications by the defendants in a claim alleging abuse
of dominance in breach of Article 102 TFEU and the Chapter II prohibition
concerning licensing of standard essential patents.
The
claimants (Vestel UK) alleged that Advance Limited (Advance), and Koninklijke
Philips NV (Philips), infringed competition law by offering licences for
patents, essential in the manufacture of televisions, on terms that were not
fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory.
The
High Court concluded that it did not have jurisdiction in relation to Vestel's
claim against Philips under Article 7(2) of the Recast Brussels
Regulation. It had not been established
that Vestel has suffered or will suffer damage as a result of the pleaded
abuse.
As
to Advance, the High Court concluded that the claimants had not shown that any
of the jurisdictional gateways in CPR Practice Direction 6B had been satisfied.
It had not been established that any damage would be sustained in England.
Vestel
Elektronik Sanayi VE Ticaret AS and Vestel UK Limited v HEVC Advance LLC and
Koninklijke Philips NV
[2019] EWHC 2766 (Ch)
No comments:
Post a Comment