High Court sets $392 million FRAND licence terms in global Samsung v ZTE patent dispute
The High Court of England and Wales has handed down a significant judgment in Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v ZTE Corporation, determining the terms of a global patent licence under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) principles.
In a decision delivered on 1 May 2026, Mr Justice Meade ruled that Samsung must pay a lump sum of $392 million to ZTE for a licence covering its portfolio of standard essential patents (SEPs) used in mobile telecommunications.
The dispute arose following the expiry of a 2021 licence agreement between the parties, with both sides unable to agree on renewal terms. Samsung had sought a judicial determination of FRAND terms from the English court in proceedings issued in December 2024.
The sum awarded by the court fell between the parties’ respective positions. Samsung had argued for a figure of approximately $200 million, while ZTE contended for a significantly higher figure of around $731 million.
In reaching its determination, the court adopted a comparator-based approach, relying in part on existing licensing agreements as a benchmark for assessing FRAND terms. The judgment rejected aspects of ZTE’s proposed methodology, including reliance on a “top-down” valuation model, and instead focused on comparable real-world agreements to establish a fair outcome.
The licence determined by the court is global in scope, reflecting the established position that English courts can set worldwide FRAND terms for SEP disputes. This authority stems from earlier case law confirming the jurisdiction’s role in resolving international patent licensing conflicts.
The case forms part of a broader, multi-jurisdictional dispute between the parties, with parallel proceedings reported in jurisdictions including China, Germany and Brazil.
The High Court also confirmed that the FRAND licence includes provisions extending beyond strictly standard essential patents, reflecting the structure of the parties’ prior commercial arrangements.
The judgment is expected to have wider implications for the resolution of global SEP disputes, particularly in reinforcing the role of the English courts as a forum for determining cross-border licensing terms. Both parties retain the right to appeal the decision.