The UK Supreme Court has revived Tesla’s claims over whether Avanci’s 5G vehicle pool licence complies with FRAND obligations for standard-essential patents. The ruling came in Tesla, Inc. v. InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc., adding a new chapter to the UK’s developing case law on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing.
A key point in the decision is the court’s view that Avanci is a central party in assessing FRAND compliance. According to the ruling, that is because Avanci set the relevant licensing fee itself, rather than simply passing through terms fixed by individual SEP owners.
That finding matters for disputes over patent pools in connected-vehicle technology. FRAND rules are meant to govern how owners of standard-essential patents license technology that implementers may need in order to use industry standards, and the court’s approach suggests that the structure and pricing decisions of a pool operator can be examined directly.
The judgment does not end the wider dispute, but it gives fresh momentum to Tesla’s challenge and is likely to be closely watched by companies involved in 5G automotive licensing. It also signals that UK courts remain an important venue for testing how FRAND obligations apply when SEP licensing is handled through a pool rather than only by individual patent holders.
