Delhi High Court Restrains Xiaomi From Enforcing Anti-Suit Injunction

Must Read

“Dismissal Without Inquiry Is Justified if Employee Did Not Prove Minimum Working Period”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the dispute relating to the termination of an employee without any disciplinary inquiry. Brief facts of the...

“Rape Victim To Be Provided Shelter Due To Media Attention Prohibited Under Section 228A of the IPC”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the petition by a rape victim for rehabilitation as she was social ostracization.  Brief facts of the...

Benefit of Probation Not Excluded by the Provisions of Mandatory Minimum Sentence Under Section 397 of Ipc

This case concerns the dispute regarding the granting of probation on good conduct to the accused under the age...

Supreme Court Asks for the Centre’s Response on PIL Filed Seeking the Formation of a Media Tribunal

The Supreme Court sought responses from the Press Council of India (PCI), News Broadcasters Association (NBA) on a PIL which sought to set up a media tribunal to tackle issues concerning the media like complaints against media, channels, and networks. Media has become like an unruly horse that has to be tamed to express the plea.

Law Student Asked the Supreme Court To Take Suo Moto Cognizance of the Violent Farmer Protests

A law student of Mumbai University, Ashish Rai has asked the Supreme Court to take Suo Moto Cognizance of the insult to the national flag done by the farmer protests at the Red Fort. In the course of the farmer's tractor rally on Tuesday, some of the protesters unfurled their own flags by entering the premises of the Red Fort.

Farmers Meeting With the Supreme Court Committee Postponed To Jan 29 Due To the Traffic Restrictions

Due to the traffic restrictions after the violent protests broke out on Republic Day, the meeting of farmers with the Supreme Court Committee that was supposed to take place today was postponed to 29th January.

Follow us

The Plaintiff (Interdigital Technology Corp.) approached the Delhi High Court seeking an injunction against Xiaomi (Defendant). The Plea sought a direction to restrain the Defendant from pursuing the anti-suit injunction order.

Facts of the Case

The Plaintiff herein filed a suit against infringement of its Standard Essential Patents (SEP) by Xiaomi. It was alleged that Xiaomi had been using its patented technology without entering into a licensing agreement. On the very same day, the Defendant filed an application, before the Wuhan Court, seeking an anti-suit injunction. And hence, restraining the Plaintiff from pursuing and prosecuting the present suit before the Court.

Plaintiff’s Arguments

Learned Senior Counsel Mr Gourab Banerjee appeared for the Plaintiff. He relied on Modi Entertainment Network v. W. S. G. Cricket Pte Ltd, where it was held that the power of Indian Courts, to grant anti-suit injunctions, against proceedings pending in foreign jurisdictions, stands recognised by the Supreme Court. 

Mr.Banerjee further draws attention to the fact that the concept of anti-enforcement injunction is unknown to Indian Law. And even in foreign jurisdictions, the concept of anti-enforcement injunction arises only when a party seeks restraint against the enforcement of a final judgement.  

Mr Banerjee further submits that the competence of Indian Courts to grant anti-anti-suit injunctions stands recognised by a Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta in Devi Resources Ltd v. Ambo Exports Ltd. And in the facts of the present case, grant of such anti-suit-injunction would be necessary to do complete justice.

Defendant’s Arguments

Mr Saikrishna Rajagopal appeared for the Defendant. He contended that the present suit before the Court is, in its nature, an anti-enforcement injunction, and not an anti-anti-suit injunction. 

Mr Rajagopal further submits that the application, of the Plaintiff, was not maintainable, as there was no prayer, in the suit, for an anti-suit injunction.

Court’s Order

The Court observed that the Order of the Wuhan Court directly negates the jurisdiction of this Court. Further, it infringes the authority of this Court to exercise its jurisdiction in accordance with the laws of this country.

Hence, the Single Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar restrained the Chinese electronics giant, Xiaomi from enforcing an anti-suit injunction order passed by Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court.

Click Here to read the judgment.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

“Dismissal Without Inquiry Is Justified if Employee Did Not Prove Minimum Working Period”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the dispute relating to the termination of an employee without any disciplinary inquiry. Brief facts of the case The Respondent, Smt. Sureshwati was...

“Rape Victim To Be Provided Shelter Due To Media Attention Prohibited Under Section 228A of the IPC”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the petition by a rape victim for rehabilitation as she was social ostracization.  Brief facts of the case In this case, a writ...

Benefit of Probation Not Excluded by the Provisions of Mandatory Minimum Sentence Under Section 397 of Ipc

This case concerns the dispute regarding the granting of probation on good conduct to the accused under the age of twenty-one years.   Brief facts of...

Supreme Court Asks for the Centre’s Response on PIL Filed Seeking the Formation of a Media Tribunal

The Supreme Court sought responses from the Press Council of India (PCI), News Broadcasters Association (NBA) on a PIL which sought to set up a media tribunal to tackle issues concerning the media like complaints against media, channels, and networks. Media has become like an unruly horse that has to be tamed to express the plea.

Law Student Asked the Supreme Court To Take Suo Moto Cognizance of the Violent Farmer Protests

A law student of Mumbai University, Ashish Rai has asked the Supreme Court to take Suo Moto Cognizance of the insult to the national flag done by the farmer protests at the Red Fort. In the course of the farmer's tractor rally on Tuesday, some of the protesters unfurled their own flags by entering the premises of the Red Fort.

Farmers Meeting With the Supreme Court Committee Postponed To Jan 29 Due To the Traffic Restrictions

Due to the traffic restrictions after the violent protests broke out on Republic Day, the meeting of farmers with the Supreme Court Committee that was supposed to take place today was postponed to 29th January.

Supreme Court Stays Bombay HC Judgment which said Groping without Skin Contact Not Sexual Assault under POCSO

The National Commission for Women (NCW) has challenged the Bombay High Court judgment where it stated that groping a child’s breasts without any ‘skin-to-skin’ contact will not be considered as sexual assault as defined under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Supreme Court Classifying Employees Based on Educational Qualifications for Promotion or Appointment Is Neither Violative of Article 14 nor of Article 16

This case concerns the dispute relating to the classification of employees belonging to the homogenous group based on educational qualifications. Brief facts of the case The...

Supreme Court Refuses To Transfer Petitions To Itself Related To ‘Love Jihad’ Filed in Allahabad High Court

On Monday, the Supreme Court refused to entertain the plea which was filed by the UP Government regarding the transfer of all the pleas challenging the ordinance the court passed, from Allahabad High Court to the Supreme Court.

Bombay HC Nagpur Bench Holds That Groping a Girl Without ‘Skin To Skin’ Contact Is Not Sexual Assault

The Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court acquitted a man charged under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) and convicted him of a minor offence under IPC stating that there was no direct physical contact.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -