Series
Blogs
Series
Blogs
Last week, the UK Supreme Court heard argument in Tesla, Inc and another v InterDigital Patent Holdings and others, a landmark case raising fundamental questions about FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) licensing obligations in the context of platform licensing of standard essential patents (SEPs).
The dispute centres on Avanci, an independent platform administrator acting as agent for over 80 SEP holders, including InterDigital. Its 5G platform provides vehicle manufacturers with a single global licence covering 2G, 3G, 4G and 5G SEPs at a flat rate of $32 per vehicle. Tesla brought proceedings in England against InterDigital and Avanci, arguing it is entitled to enforce the FRAND commitments of SEP holders on the platform by seeking a global platform licence at a rate below $32, which it contends far exceeds a FRAND rate. Tesla's claim also included a challenge to the validity of three of InterDigital’s UK SEPs. Both the court at first instance and, by a majority, the Court of Appeal (Arnold LJ dissenting) held that that there was no serious issue to be tried against either Avanci or InterDigital in respect of the FRAND licensing claim. On the issue of forum conveniens (which was not decided by the Court of Appeal due to its finding of no serious issue to be tried), the High Court also found that Tesla had failed to show the Delaware court was not an available alternative forum or that England was clearly the more appropriate venue. Tesla appeals on the basis that there is a serious issue to be tried against both parties and on forum conveniens grounds. InterDigital cross-appeals, contending that the licensing claims were not validly served on it as of right.
We set out herein some of the more broadly applicable points of note from the Supreme Court hearing.
Outlook
Predicting the outcome would be premature, but it appears that Tesla's case is more robust than its defeats at the High Court and Court of Appeal might indicate. The number of points on which the Court pressed Avanci and InterDigital’s case may suggest that aspects of it are more open to challenge than they might initially have appeared, though it could also simply reflect a rigorous testing of their arguments. In any event, the exchanges underscore the complexity and importance of the issues at hand and illustrate why this dispute has reached the Supreme Court. Judgment can be expected later this year.
4 May 2026
Up next