Vestel Elektronik Sanayi VE Ticaret AS Vestel UK Ltd v HEVC Advance LLC & Anor [2019] EWHC 2766 (Ch) (21 October 2019)

Vestel Elektronik Sanayi VE Ticaret AS Vestel UK Ltd v HEVC Advance LLC & Anor [2019] EWHC 2766 (Ch) (21 October 2019)

The English court does not have jurisdiction over Vestel's claim against Philips because Vestel UK has not suffered or will suffer direct damage in the UK arising from the alleged abuse. The claim against Advance was not determined in this judgment, but the court clarified the applicable legal tests for jurisdictional gateways and direct damage.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2766 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Vestel Elektronik Sanayi ve Ticaret AS; Claimant: Vestel UK Limited; Defendant: HEVC Advance LLC; Defendant: Koninklijke Philips NV
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Jurisdictional Challenge and Application to Amend Claim / Interlocutory Judgment
Outcome
Claim against Philips dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; claim against Advance not determined.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Dominant Position, FRAND Licensing, Jurisdiction, Patent Pools, Standard Essential Patents
Competition Law Intellectual Property Law Civil Procedure Abuse of Dominant Position FRAND Licensing Jurisdiction Patent Pools Standard Essential Patents

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vestel Elektronik Sanayi ve Ticaret AS

Claimant

Vestel UK Limited

Claimant

HEVC Advance LLC

Defendant

Koninklijke Philips NV

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Jurisdictional Challenge and Application to Amend Claim / Interlocutory Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction over claims of abuse of dominant position against Philips and Advance
  2. 2 Whether Vestel UK has suffered or will suffer direct damage within the jurisdiction
  3. 3 Application of jurisdictional gateways under CPR Practice Direction 6B

Ratio Decidendi

The English court does not have jurisdiction over Vestel's claim against Philips because Vestel UK has not suffered or will suffer direct damage in the UK arising from the alleged abuse. The claim against Advance was not determined in this judgment, but the court clarified the applicable legal tests for jurisdictional gateways and direct damage.

Court Disposition

Claim against Philips dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; claim against Advance not determined.

Orders

  • Court has no jurisdiction over Vestel's claim against Philips.
  • Application to amend particulars of claim considered but not determined in this judgment.