Overview

• Proceedings began at the Competition Appeal Tribunal in London with Which? presenting opening submissions in a five-week liability phase.
• Which? alleges Qualcomm abused dominance in patent licensing and chip supply, inflating royalties that manufacturers passed on through higher prices or reduced handset quality.
• Counsel for Which? argued Qualcomm used the threat of supply disruption to force licence terms, characterising the approach as “no licence, no chips” and saying royalties were charged on every phone.
• The opt-out claim covers new Apple and Samsung phones bought in the UK from 1 October 2015 to 9 January 2024, with an estimated average payout of about £17 per device if damages are awarded.
• Qualcomm rejects the allegations as baseless, saying its requirement to license standard‑essential patents before chipset purchases is being mischaracterised; any damages would be decided only if liability is found.