CA-2025-001926 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1383

Appeal ground 4: comity

ZTE contend that the declarations made by the judge, and in particular declarations 3 and 4, contravene comity. ZTE’s argument is a straightforward one. The useful purpose identified by the judge for making these declarations was to force ZTE to reconsider its position as to its preferred forum. ZTE submit that this is a blatant interference with the Chongqing Court, because it is intended to discourage ZTE from pursuing proceedings there which the Chinese courts have held to be entirely proper from a jurisdictional perspective. ZTE argue that this goes significantly further than this Court did in either Panasonic v Xiaomi or Lenovo v Ericsson. It is no answer to say, as the judge did, that it is for the Chongqing Court to decide what to do, because Samsung’s objective is to get ZTE to abandon the Chongqing proceedings.

It is not necessary to decide whether to allow the appeal on this ground given that I would allow it on grounds 1 and 2. It is sufficient to say that it seems to me that comity is a real concern in this case.