LawPosted 09/25/202609/25/2026 at 6:20 am

Which? Agrees to Drop Its Qualcomm Claim With No Payment

Starts 02/13/2026CONFIRMED89% CONFIDENCE

The tribunal's case page says 'On 13 February 2026, Which? and Qualcomm filed a joint collective settlement approval order ("CSAO") application' and the judgment cites 'the settlement agreement dated 13 February 2026'.^[1]

Start: Feb 13, 202690% CONFIDENCEsource

Which? Agrees to Drop Its Qualcomm Claim With No Payment

Which? and Qualcomm signed a 'drop hands' settlement ending its UK class action, valued at about GBP 482.5 million, with no money for consumers, and jointly asked the Competition Appeal Tribunal to approve it.

On 13 February 2026 Which? and Qualcomm signed a settlement of the UK smartphone class action and filed a joint application for the tribunal's approval^[1][2].
It is a 'drop hands' deal: no damages for the roughly 29 million class members, each side pays its own costs, and Which? releases the claims^[2].
Which? said that after the 12-day trial it expected the judgment to find Qualcomm did not coerce Apple, Apple's contract manufacturers or Samsung, did not leverage its chip supply, and did not inflate royalties or phone prices^[2][3].
The parties had told the tribunal on 23 January 2026 that they had agreed in principle; the tribunal, whose draft judgment was 'at an advanced stage', paused work on it^[2].
Qualcomm said the outcome reaffirmed that its licensing practices are lawful and do not harm competition^[3].

@LawDesk

References 389% CONFIDENCEOverall confidence: 89%How well the pin's source and references back up its dates.Weighted average of how firmly 3 references, the source included, support the pin's start and end times; a reference counts half as much for every 180 days older than the newestShow all pins at 75% confidence or better

The first entry is always the pin's source. Overall confidence is a weighted average of how firmly each reference supports the start and end times used above; a reference counts half as much for every 180 days older than the newest.

[1]90%
catribunal.org.uk/cases/13827721-consumers-association
catribunal.org.uk· Posted Sep 25, 2026· Starts Feb 13, 2026 ✓· 48% of score
The tribunal's case page says 'On 13 February 2026, Which? and Qualcomm filed a joint collective settlement approval order ("CSAO") application' and the judgment cites 'the settlement agreement dated 13 February 2026'.
[2]92%
Consumers' Association v Qualcomm Incorporated [2026] CAT 50, Judgment (CSAO Application)
catribunal.org.uk· Published Jun 10, 2026· 32% of score
Sets out the agreement dated 13 February 2026 (amended 20 May), the 23 January agreement in principle, and Which?'s view that the trial judgment would likely find Qualcomm did not coerce Apple or Samsung or inflate royalties.^[1]
[3]84%
British Consumer Association Withdraws Competition Claim Against Qualcomm
ipwatchdog.com· Published Feb 18, 2026· 21% of score
Reports Which?'s Tuesday press release that Qualcomm would pay nothing and Which? would apply to withdraw, and Qualcomm's response that the outcome 'reaffirms what the courts in the United States have repeatedly held'.^[1]

Suggest a correction

Something missing or wrong? Say it in your own words: a link that backs this pin up, a different start or end date and why, or a fact it lacks or gets wrong. The AI checks it against this pin's sources, searches for better ones, and adds any page that backs you up. The pin's own sources still count most. A picture that shows something else, or shows it badly, is looked at too, and moved down or replaced.

Which? Agrees to Drop Its Qualcomm Claim With No Payment

On 13 February 2026 Which? and Qualcomm signed a settlement of the UK smartphone class action and filed a joint application for the tribunal's approval^[1][2].
It is a 'drop hands' deal: no damages for the roughly 29 million class members, each side pays its own costs, and Which? releases the claims^[2].
Which? said that after the 12-day trial it expected the judgment to find Qualcomm did not coerce Apple, Apple's contract manufacturers or Samsung, did not leverage its chip supply, and did not inflate royalties or phone prices^[2][3].
The parties had told the tribunal on 23 January 2026 that they had agreed in principle; the tribunal, whose draft judgment was 'at an advanced stage', paused work on it^[2].
Qualcomm said the outcome reaffirmed that its licensing practices are lawful and do not harm competition^[3].

References 389% CONFIDENCE

[1]90%

catribunal.org.uk/cases/13827721-consumers-association

catribunal.org.uk· Posted Sep 25, 2026· Starts Feb 13, 2026 ✓· 48% of score

[2]92%

Consumers' Association v Qualcomm Incorporated [2026] CAT 50, Judgment (CSAO Application)

catribunal.org.uk· Published Jun 10, 2026· 32% of score

Sets out the agreement dated 13 February 2026 (amended 20 May), the 23 January agreement in principle, and Which?'s view that the trial judgment would likely find Qualcomm did not coerce Apple or Samsung or inflate royalties.^[1]

[3]84%

British Consumer Association Withdraws Competition Claim Against Qualcomm

ipwatchdog.com· Published Feb 18, 2026· 21% of score

Reports Which?'s Tuesday press release that Qualcomm would pay nothing and Which? would apply to withdraw, and Qualcomm's response that the outcome 'reaffirms what the courts in the United States have repeatedly held'.^[1]

Suggest a correction