Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
Update:
- The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal OK’d UK consumer group Which? to pursue a legal claim demanding Qualcomm cough up more than £482M to compensate millions of smartphone buyers in the UK.
- On May 17, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal issued a judgment granting permission for Which? to move ahead with legal proceedings against the United States chipmaker.
- The landmark claim alleges Qualcomm took advantage of its dominance in the patent licensing and chip market to charge companies like Apple and Samsung inflated prices to license its technology, which the smartphone makers then passed on to customers.
- Qualcomm told reporters it would continue to fight the case.
- “We disagree with today’s ruling, though it is strictly procedural and in no way supportive of the plaintiff’s meritless assertions,” it says in a Mobile World Live article.
(Feb. 25, 2021)
A company that makes chips for smartphones is facing a legal claim demanding it cough up more than £482M to compensate millions of smartphone buyers in the U.K.
The landmark claim alleges United States chipmaker Qualcomm took advantage of its dominance in the patent licensing and chip market to charge companies like Apple and Samsung inflated prices to license its technology.
It says those inflated prices have been passed on to smartphone buyers.
The complaint was filed Wednesday by consumer advocacy group Which?, under U.K. competition law. The organisation is seeking damages for all affected Apple and Samsung smartphones purchased since 1 October 2015, and is seeking a collective total of £482.5 million.
About 29 million people in the U.K. may be entitled to compensation of up to £30 if the legal claim is successful, the BBC reported. The claim is “opt-out,” meaning anyone who falls within the scope of the proposed class is considered a member unless they explicitly opt-out.
The claim focuses on Qualcomm’s practice of refusing to provide rival chipmakers with licences for its patents covering cell phone technology that have been deemed essential by standard setting organisations, Law360 reported.
It also targets Qualcomm’s refusal to supply chipsets to smartphone makers unless those companies purchase a separate licence and pay royalties.
The allegations are similar to those made in the United States by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission in an antitrust enforcement action against Qualcomm lodged in 2017, as well as a proposed class action from 250 million U.S. cellphone customers looking to recover around £3.5 billion in damages from the chipmaker.
Qualcomm is fighting both cases in the U.S., where an appellate court last year handed the company a big win, rejecting the FTC’s case as reaching beyond the boundaries of the country’s antitrust laws.
A representative for Qualcomm said in a statement Wednesday the U.S. ruling shows there’s no basis for the lawsuit lodged in the U.K., Law360 reported.
“As the plaintiffs are well aware, their claims were effectively put to rest last summer by a unanimous panel of judges at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the United States,” the statement said.
However, Which? Chief Executive Anabel Hoult said Qualcomm’s practice is anti-competitive and “needs to stop,” the BBC reported.
“We are sending a clear warning that if companies like Qualcomm indulge in manipulative practices which harm consumers, Which? is prepared to take action.”
Do you own an Apple or Samsung phone and have been affected by Qualcomm’s alleged anti-competitive behaviour ? Let us know in the comments.
It filed its legal claim with the Competition Appeal Tribunal, which will decide if it can go ahead.
Which? is represented by Hausfeld & Co LLP, supported by a team at Monckton Chambers.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
