Interdigital Technology Corp & Ors v Lenovo Group Ltd & Ors

Douglas Campbell KC and Michael Conway (instructed by Gowling WLG (UK) LLP) for the Claimants Ravi Mehta (instructed by Kirkland & Ellis International LLP) for the Defendants Martin Howe KC (instructed by Lee & Thompson LLP) for Third Party Wistron Geoffrey Pritchard (instructed by Morrison & Foerster LLP) for Third Party NEC Sarah Love (instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP) for Third Party Apple Hearing date: 5th April 2023 ____________________

HTML VERSION OF APPROVED JUDGMENT ON CONFIDENTIALITY ISSUES ____________________

i) First, InterDigital together with the following 'Third Parties': Samsung, Apple, Xiaomi, Huawei, ZTE, Acer, Wistron, NEC, Innovius, AB and PA Consulting. All these parties effectively made common cause to the effect that I should maintain all redactions in the current public judgment, even though each licensee addressed only information confidential to themselves.

ii) Second, and by way of exception to the position taken by other of InterDigital licensees:

iii) Third, Lenovo submitted that the principles of open justice required the Court to take a quite different approach to that proposed by InterDigital and the Third Parties. Thus, it was Lenovo who was contending that a number of the redactions should be removed, although I should point out that I have not limited my consideration just to Lenovo's contentions because all redactions need to be properly justified.