England’s Court of Appeal Endorses Nokia’s ‘Adjustable Licence Offers’ in RAND Dispute with Acer and ASUS – June Trial Halted

The Court of Appeal of England and Wales issued a landmark ruling on 12 May 2026 in Acer Incorporated & Anor v Nokia Technologies Oy [2026] EWCA Civ 564, granting Nokia a case management stay against London-based RAND licence proceedings brought by Acer and ASUS. A three-judge panel comprising Lord Justice Peter Jackson, Lord Justice Arnold and Lord Justice Zacaroli held that Nokia’s so-called Adjustable Licence Offers constituted valid offers of licences on RAND terms, effectively halting the implementer-led RAND determination proceedings.

The dispute concerns Nokia’s portfolio of standard essential patents (SEPs) declared essential to the ITU-T H.264/AVC and H.265/HEVC video coding standards. Acer and ASUS are major implementers of these codecs in laptops, smart televisions and related products. The two Taiwanese implementers had filed London proceedings seeking a determination of RAND terms from the English court, following the framework established in the 2020 Supreme Court decision in Unwired Planet v Huawei, which confirmed that English courts have jurisdiction to set global RAND licence terms in SEP disputes.

Nokia’s procedural response did not contest English jurisdiction. Instead, the Finnish telecommunications company offered each implementer an Adjustable Licence Offer, under which an interim licence would be granted immediately while the final commercial terms would be determined by an ICC arbitral tribunal. Core financial parameters were largely settled in advance, with adjustment mechanisms reserving final calibration to the arbitration. This structure was designed to provide implementers with immediate continued access to standard-compliant technology while consolidating worldwide RAND determination in a single arbitral forum.

The Court of Appeal preserved English jurisdiction over RAND licence claims, in line with the Unwired Planet framework. However, the court accepted that Nokia’s Adjustable Licence Offers satisfied the RAND requirement and granted a case management stay of the proceedings themselves. The trial that had been scheduled for June and July 2026 will not proceed. A Nokia spokesperson welcomed the ruling, stating that the court had confirmed the legitimacy of Nokia’s arbitration-based approach. Acer and ASUS have indicated they are reviewing the judgment.

The industry implications of the ruling cut in two directions. For SEP holders, the Court of Appeal has now formally endorsed a route by which well-structured arbitration-backed Adjustable Licence Offers can foreclose implementer-led RAND proceedings. This represents a significant counterweight to the post-Unwired Planet trend in which implementers had increasingly favoured court-led RAND determination as a strategic forum.

For implementers, the ruling creates a structural shift. Once a SEP holder presents a properly designed Adjustable Licence Offer with an arbitration mechanism, the prospect of obtaining an independent court determination of RAND terms becomes materially harder. The Court of Appeal’s reasoning rests on the premise that the arbitration mechanism is impartial and effective – described in the judgment as “unimpeachable” – so the focus going forward will be on whether SEP holders can consistently design arbitration clauses that meet this bar.

Nokia has pursued multi-jurisdictional enforcement against Acer and ASUS since 2023, including proceedings in Germany, the United States and the United Kingdom. The English ruling is a significant milestone in Nokia’s strategy of foreclosing court-led RAND determination in favour of arbitration-driven global licence resolution. In the video coding patent ecosystem, patent pools such as Avanci Video and Via LA also play substantial roles, and the ruling may influence how implementers position themselves in relation to collective licensing structures.

The judgment confirms that England remains a leading forum for SEP licensing disputes while simultaneously expanding the scope for arbitration mechanisms within that framework. For Japanese electronics and telecommunications manufacturers, the case raises practical strategic questions about the appropriate response when receiving an Adjustable Licence Offer from a SEP holder. Careful scrutiny of arbitration clauses at the earliest stages of negotiation now becomes a critical element of SEP licensing strategy.