Supreme Court Awards Rs. 6 Lakh to Man Acquitted After 6 Years, Faults UP Police Probe  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Can Restore Power on 50% Deposit in Arbitrary Theft Assessments  ||  Supreme Court: Cooperative Society Cannot Deny RTI Records as Personal if Registrar Can Access Them  ||  SC: CoC Cannot Withdraw Approved Resolution Plan Over Improved Corporate Debtor Finances  ||  Delhi High Court: 24-Week Limit Alone Cannot Restrict Medical Termination of Pregnancy  ||  Allahabad High Court Rejects Challenge to 18% GST on Online Legal Database Services  ||  Madras High Court: FIR Registration Does Not Decide Guilt; Prior Hearing of Accused Not Required  ||  Kerala High Court Orders Speedy Prosecution Sanction Process in Sabarimala Gold Theft Case  ||  Allahabad HC: Missing RT-PCR Report Cannot Bar COVID-19 Compensation if Records Confirm Infection  ||  MP High Court Directs Indore Police to Deploy Volunteers for Reporting Noise Pollution Violations    

Telefonktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Lava International Ltd. - (High Court of Delhi) (01 Mar 2016)

Ericsson to reveal licensing agreements in confidentiality club

MANU/DE/0737/2016

Intellectual Property Rights

The Delhi High Court, hearing a patent dispute between Ericsson and Lava International granted Ericsson’s application to continue the matter under the veil of a ‘confidentiality club’. Simply put, such confidentiality measures are put in place during the course of legal proceedings to restrict the spread of sensitive information - in this case commercial information about licensing and pricing of patents pertaining to cellular transmission. Both parties will be restricted in the number of lawyers and experts who can peruse confidential information and are barred, unsurprisingly, from discussing the same in other legal proceedings or publicly.

The dispute between the companies hinges on Ericsson’s claim that Lava infringed several of its patents, used in mobile phones. The court will also have to determine if Ericsson charges licensees fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory rates for its parcel of Standard Essential Patents. It is for the latter that Ericsson requested confidential proceedings, though Lava submitted that since licensing rates are not confidential information, it is indicative of unfair licensing practices.

Relevant : Mr. M. Sivasamy vs. Vestergaard Frandsen A/S and Ors. MANU/DE/1724/2009 MVF 3 APS & Ors. vs. M. Sivasamy & Ors. MANU/DE/5492/2012

Tags : CELLULAR   FRAND   LICENSING RATE   CONFIDENTIALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved