UK Court Orders Samsung to Pay ZTE $392 Million

On 1 May 2026, according to relevant media reports, the High Court of England and Wales issued a first-instance judgment in the global patent licensing dispute between Samsung Electronics and ZTE Corporation, ruling that Samsung must pay ZTE a one‑off patent royalty of US392million(approximatelyRMB2.677billion).However,althoughthisamountissubstantial,ithassparkedconsiderablecontroversyintheinternationallegalcommunity–notonlyisitfarlowerthantheUS392million(approximatelyRMB2.677billion).However,althoughthisamountissubstantial,ithassparkedconsiderablecontroversyintheinternationallegalcommunity–notonlyisitfarlowerthantheUS731 million claimed by ZTE, but it also stands in stark contrast to recent rulings by courts in other countries, making the UK judgment an apparent “outlier” in the global patent dispute.

The root of this dispute dates back to a patent cross‑licensing agreement signed between the parties in 2021. After that agreement expired at the end of 2023, the parties became severely divided over renewal royalty rates covering 4G and 5G standard essential patents (SEPs).

As negotiations reached an impasse, Samsung initiated proceedings in the London High Court in December 2024, seeking to establish the UK as the “hub” for global royalty rate determination. Faced with this move, ZTE did not passively respond but quickly filed parallel litigation in multiple jurisdictions, including China (Chongqing), Germany (Frankfurt and Munich), the Unified Patent Court (UPC), and Brazil. Thus began a “global court battle” over patent pricing power and jurisdiction.

In the judgment delivered on 1 May local time, Justice Richard Meade of the High Court of Justice’s Patents Court was faced with a huge gap between the parties’ claims: Samsung argued for a maximum royalty of US200million,whileZTEinsistedthatitspatentportfoliowasworthUS200million,whileZTEinsistedthatitspatentportfoliowasworthUS731 million.

In the end, Justice Meade did not fully adopt either party’s proposal. Instead, he took a distinctive approach, relying purely on a “comparable agreements” methodology to calculate the royalty, and rejected the industry‑standard “top‑down” approach as a cross‑check. Based on this, the court ruled that Samsung, as a net licensee, must pay ZTE a balancing sum of approximately US$392 million. This judgment is a first‑instance decision, and both parties have the right to appeal to a higher court. China Intellectual Property Lawyer Network will continue to follow subsequent developments.