Sandisk Corporation v Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV & Ors

Sandisk Corporation v Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV & Ors

The English court lacks substantive jurisdiction under Article 5(3) of the Brussels Regulation because neither the alleged abusive acts nor immediate damage occurred in England and Wales; the alleged abuses and enforcement actions took place in other EU Member States. The requirements for interim relief under Article 31 are not met as there is no real connecting link to the jurisdiction. The enforcement of patent rights through legal and administrative proceedings is not abusive unless the high threshold set out in ITT Promedia is met, which is not the case here.

Parties
Claimant: SanDisk Corporation; First Defendant: Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.; Second Defendant: France Télécom S.A.; Third Defendant: TDF; Fourth Defendant: Institut für Rundfunktechnik GmbH; Fifth Defendant: Societá Italiana per lo Sviluppo dell’Elettronica S.P.A. (Sisvel)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil (competition/commercial) / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Interim Relief
Outcome
Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and refusal of interim relief.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Dominant Position, Jurisdiction Under Brussels Regulation, Interim Relief, Patent Licensing, Tying Practices, Border Detention Orders
Competition Law Intellectual Property Law Civil Procedure European Union Law Abuse of Dominant Position Jurisdiction Under Brussels Regulation Interim Relief Patent Licensing +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SanDisk Corporation

Claimant

Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.

First Defendant

France Télécom S.A.

Second Defendant

TDF

Third Defendant

Institut für Rundfunktechnik GmbH

Fourth Defendant

Societá Italiana per lo Sviluppo dell’Elettronica S.P.A. (Sisvel)

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (competition/commercial) / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has substantive jurisdiction under Article 5(3) of the Brussels Regulation to hear claims of abuse of dominant position against foreign defendants
  2. 2 Whether the alleged abuses caused immediate damage in England and Wales
  3. 3 Whether interim relief can be granted under Article 31 of the Brussels Regulation

Ratio Decidendi

The English court lacks substantive jurisdiction under Article 5(3) of the Brussels Regulation because neither the alleged abusive acts nor immediate damage occurred in England and Wales; the alleged abuses and enforcement actions took place in other EU Member States. The requirements for interim relief under Article 31 are not met as there is no real connecting link to the jurisdiction. The enforcement of patent rights through legal and administrative proceedings is not abusive unless the high threshold set out in ITT Promedia is met, which is not the case here.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and refusal of interim relief.