Interdigital Technology Corporation vs Xiaomi Corporation

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2020 Supreme(Del) 989

C.HARI SHANKAR
Interdigital Technology Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Xiaomi Corporation – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Gourab Banerji, Advocate, Pravin Anand, Advocate, Vaishali Mittal, Advocate, Siddhant Chamola, Advocate, Manisha Singh, Advocate, Pallavi Bhatnagar, Advocate, Saikrishna Rajagopal, Advocate, Siddharth Chopra, Advocate, Sneha Jain, Advocate, Garima Sahney, Advocate, Anu Paarcha, Advocate, Victor Vaibhav Tandon, Advocate, Arjun Gadhoke, Advocate, Stuti Dhyani, Advocate, Charu Grover, Advocate

Judgement Key Points

What is the legality and appropriateness of granting an ad interim anti-suit/enforcement injunction to restrain enforcement of a foreign court order in respect of SEP FRAND disputes? What are the applicable principles and conditions (Modi Entertainment Network & Dinesh Singh Thakur) for granting anti-suit injunctions in the context of parallel foreign proceedings, and how do they apply to comity versus justice? What constitutes maintainability and scope of relief when the foreign anti-suit order seeks to stop Indian court proceedings involving domestic SEPs and FRAND disputes?

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)

What is the legality and appropriateness of granting an ad interim anti-suit/enforcement injunction to restrain enforcement of a foreign court order in respect of SEP FRAND disputes?

What are the applicable principles and conditions (Modi Entertainment Network & Dinesh Singh Thakur) for granting anti-suit injunctions in the context of parallel foreign proceedings, and how do they apply to comity versus justice?

What constitutes maintainability and scope of relief when the foreign anti-suit order seeks to stop Indian court proceedings involving domestic SEPs and FRAND disputes?

JUDGMENT

C. Hari Shankar, J. - I.A. 8772/2020 in CS(COMM) 295/2020

1. In a standard essential patent (SEP) royalty rate-setting suit, preferred against the plaintiff before the Wuhan Intermediate People''s Court (hereinafter referred to as "the Wuhan Court"), the defendant moved an application, on 4th August, 2020, seeking an anti-suit injunction, restraining the plaintiffs from prosecuting the present suit before this Court. In the said application, the Wuhan Court has, vide order dated 23rd September, 2020, issued the following directions:

"1. Upon service of this ruling, the Respondents InterDigital, Inc. and InterDigital Holdings, Inc. as well as the affiliates thereof shall immediately withdraw or suspend their application for any temporary injunction before the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi of India against the Applicants Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd., Xiaomi Home Commercial Co., Ltd., and Beijing Xiaomi Mobile Software Co., Ltd. as well as its affiliates in terms of the 3G and 4G SEPs involved in the present case;

2. Upon service of this ruling, the Respondents InterDigital, Inc. and InterDigital Holdings, Inc. as well as the affiliates thereof shall immediately withdraw

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2020 Supreme(Del) 989

C.HARI SHANKARInterdigital Technology Corporation – AppellantVersusXiaomi Corporation – Respondent

What is the legality and appropriateness of granting an ad interim anti-suit/enforcement injunction to restrain enforcement of a foreign court order in respect of SEP FRAND disputes?

What are the applicable principles and conditions (Modi Entertainment Network & Dinesh Singh Thakur) for granting anti-suit injunctions in the context of parallel foreign proceedings, and how do they apply to comity versus justice?

What constitutes maintainability and scope of relief when the foreign anti-suit order seeks to stop Indian court proceedings involving domestic SEPs and FRAND disputes?

Cases Referred (12)

C.HARI SHANKAR
Interdigital Technology Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Xiaomi Corporation – Respondent