- within Intellectual Property topic(s)
- in United States
- with readers working within the Pharmaceuticals & BioTech and Telecomms industries
- within Cannabis & Hemp, Law Practice Management and Privacy topic(s)
The Patents Court granted, without notice, a global interim anti-anti-suit injunction (AASI) and associated orders in favour of Warner Bros Discovery (WBD) against Nokia, together with permission for service out and a confidentiality order. The relief is designed to preserve the English Court's ability to hear WBD's implementer-led RAND/FRAND claims concerning SEPs in Nokia's video portfolio and to prevent Nokia from seeking anti-suit or anti-interim licence injunctions abroad that would restrain WBD's English action. The judgment is a measured but firm response to the emerging tactic of seeking anti-interim licence injunctions (AILIs) in Germany and the UPC following the recent Amazon v InterDigital developments.
The relief granted
The Court granted a "full-throated" interim AASI with global reach, including:
- Prohibitory relief restraining Nokia and its affiliates from seeking or continuing anti-suit/anti-interim licence relief that would stifle the English action, including WBD's pursuit of interim adjustable declarations.
- Mandatory orders requiring Nokia to procure that its affiliates refrain from such steps, and to stay or not enforce any foreign anti-suit measures already obtained.
- Ancillary anti-enforcement elements to ensure effectiveness of the AASI.
The order covers the entirety of WBD's pleaded relief, including declarations of final RAND terms, interim adjustable licensing relief, and any enforcement or continuation applications. Mellor J considered global scope necessary to avoid displacement of the tactic to other fora.
Why without notice
Although the Court is wary of ex parte relief in multinational FRAND disputes, Mellor J accepted that even very short notice risked enabling Nokia to obtain rapid ex parte anti-suit measures in Germany or the UPC by reference to the Amazon v Interdigital precedents, thereby irreparably undermining the English Court's jurisdictional protection.
Comity, de-escalation and interim licences
The judgment underscores the present tension between the English approach to interim adjustable declarations and concerns voiced by German and UPC courts regarding interference with EU antitrust oversight and patent enforcement. Mellor J expressed the hope that forthcoming English rulings (including his own in Acer/ASUS/Hisense, and the Court of Appeal's recent Samsung v ZTE decision) will refine the practice around interim licences and reduce cross-border friction. Until then, targeted interim measures such as this AASI are warranted to prevent unilateral procedural escalation that disables the English Court's role.
Practical implications
For implementers, the decision reaffirms that the English Court will move quickly to protect implementer-led FRAND claims against foreign anti-suit tactics—particularly in the wake of the Munich/UPC AILIs. For SEP owners, it signals that attempts to pre-empt English proceedings via ex parte foreign AILIs or ASIs risk prompt countermeasures in London, including mandatory and anti-enforcement elements with global reach. Strategically, the Court encourages de-escalation and cautions against procedural arms races, while preserving a route for English adjudication of UK-anchored FRAND disputes pending inter partes hearings.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
