UK Government Announces Targeted Reforms to Standard Essential Patent Licensing

Key Takeaways

On 13 October 2026, the UK Government published its response following its consultation on Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), setting out a package of targeted reforms intended to improve the operation of the SEP licensing ecosystem and the determination of fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing terms, particularly for UK businesses, particularly SMEs.

Rather than pursuing major legislative change, the Government has opted for a measured approach focused on improving dispute resolution, enhancing transparency, supporting better licensing practices and promoting earlier resolution of disputes. The key measures announced include:

• Exploring a court-anchored early FRAND determination process within existing court proceedings.
• Investigating the feasibility and design of an IPO-led FRAND opinion service to provide a preliminary view on proposed licence offers.
• Developing voluntary mechanisms to improve access to standard-related patent information.
• Supporting more structured pre-litigation engagement and information exchange.
• Producing practical guidance for SEP licensing negotiations, particularly for SMEs and less experienced market participants.
• Working with industry to improve transparency and consistency in essentiality assessments.

Background and Context

The consultation, which ran between July and October 2025, received 93 responses from a wide range of businesses, industry bodies, legal practitioners, academics and other stakeholders with direct experience of SEP licensing. The Government sought evidence on whether the existing framework functions effectively and whether reforms were necessary to improve transparency, facilitate negotiations and support more efficient dispute resolution.

The importance of the identified issues, and the need to improve the SEP licensing process, is only expected to grow. A well-functioning SEP ecosystem enables businesses to access technologies incorporated into technical standards while ensuring innovators receive an appropriate return on their investment in research and development. This is particularly significant for sectors such as telecommunications, which contributes more than £40 billion annually to UK GDP, for industries which are seeing increasing levels of connectivity and standardisation, such as automotives, medtech and streaming, as well as for emerging technologies including AI, advanced connectivity, quantum technologies and semiconductors.

Focus on Dispute Resolution, Not Structural Reform

A central theme of the Government's response is improving the efficiency of SEP dispute resolution without fundamentally altering existing legal frameworks. The Government intends to work with the judiciary to explore an early FRAND determination pathway within ongoing court proceedings and to develop FRAND licensing guidelines to assist parties navigating negotiations. 

Support for this approach is likely to be found in the fact that the English judiciary is highly experienced and well regarded in handling FRAND disputes. Since the Supreme Court's decision in Unwired Planet in 2020, the English courts have become a recognised forum for the determination of global FRAND licence terms, including worldwide royalty rates for SEPs. Moreover, many of the specialist patent judges previously practised as leading barristers in this field, advising on and appearing in FRAND- and SEP-related disputes. This concentration of judicial and practical expertise reinforces the reputation of the English courts as a reliable and sophisticated venue for resolving FRAND disputes and helps explain the Government's preference for targeted procedural improvements rather than broader structural reform. 

The Intellectual Property Office will also conduct further work on the feasibility and design of a voluntary FRAND Opinion Service. The objective would be to provide parties with an early indication of whether a proposed licence offer falls within a FRAND range, potentially narrowing disputes before litigation escalates.

No New Rate Determination Track

One of the most significant outcomes is the decision, at this stage, not to introduce a dedicated Rate Determination Track (RDT) within the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court.

Although consultation responses generally supported the objective of creating a faster, more affordable and predictable route to determine FRAND royalty rates, there was little consensus on how such a process should operate in practice. Rights holders, implementers and businesses of different sizes expressed differing views regarding valuation methodologies, disclosure requirements and procedural safeguards.

The Government concluded that the evidence did not demonstrate that a standalone RDT would provide a sufficiently clear or workable solution. Instead, improvements to guidance, transparency and dispute-resolution mechanisms will better address stakeholder concerns.

Improving Transparency and Access to Information

The consultation highlighted difficulties faced by implementers, particularly SMEs, in identifying which patents are relevant to a particular standard. Existing information is often fragmented across various standard development organisations (SDOs) and databases, making licensing assessments difficult.

While many respondents supported the creation of a centralised SEP database, the Government stopped short of introducing a mandatory disclosure regime. Instead, it will develop a voluntary route for rights holders to provide standard-related patent information to the IPO and will work with industry to make SEP information more accessible.

The Government also recognised ongoing concerns regarding patent essentiality. However, it concluded that the evidence did not currently justify creation of an IPO-operated essentiality assessment service. Existing commercial services remain available, and concerns were raised about cost, complexity and the risk of the IPO becoming involved in quasi-judicial determinations.

Injunctions and Remedies Remain Unchanged

The Government carefully considered concerns regarding the potential use of injunctions during SEP licensing negotiations. It noted concerns about bad-faith negotiation practices and intends to develop best-practice guidance for SEP licensing negotiations, particularly for those new to SEP licensing. Together with the proposed transparency measures, this guidance is intended to promote more efficient negotiations and help address problematic conduct where it arises.

Overall, however, it found insufficient evidence that the current framework is systematically hindering market entry, discouraging innovation or forcing businesses to withdraw products from the UK market. As a result, the Government does not intend to limit the availability of injunctions in SEP disputes. It noted that UK courts already apply significant judicial scrutiny before granting injunctive relief and that the existing framework remains internationally respected.

Non-regulatory and international efforts

The IPO intends to build on its existing non-regulatory initiatives, including its leadership role in the Intergovernmental SEP Network (ISN) and continued engagement with SDOs. Respondents were generally supportive of these efforts, viewing greater international cooperation as an important means of improving transparency, reducing fragmentation between jurisdictions and promoting more consistent approaches to SEP licensing and dispute resolution.

The Government's emphasis on international collaboration reflects the inherently global nature of SEP disputes. The recent dispute between Amazon and InterDigital illustrates the challenges that can arise when courts in different jurisdictions address overlapping FRAND issues. Parallel proceedings before various international courts, including the English courts, the UPC and the Munich courts, together with anti-suit injunctions and related procedural disputes, increased the complexity and costs for the parties involved. Greater cooperation and alignment between courts in key SEP jurisdictions, including the UK, UPC and Germany, is therefore likely to be welcomed by both SEP holders and implementers.

Reflection

The Government's response reflects a deliberate preference for targeted and proportionate reform rather than wholesale intervention. Its focus will be on improving transparency, facilitating earlier resolution of disputes, encouraging constructive pre-action conduct and helping businesses, particularly SMEs, navigate SEP licensing more effectively. Over the coming months, the IPO will continue engaging with stakeholders as these measures are developed. Taken together, the reforms seek to make SEP licensing more accessible and predictable while preserving the flexibility and balance of the existing UK framework. 

The UK's courts have already played a leading role in developing pragmatic solutions to the challenges posed by global FRAND disputes, and the measures proposed by the Government seek to build on that foundation. By promoting greater transparency, encouraging constructive licensing negotiations and facilitating earlier resolution of disputes, the reforms support the continued development of the UK as a leading forum for SEP litigation and FRAND determinations.

Recent case law illustrates the willingness of the English courts to adopt innovative approaches to (F)RAND disputes. The Court of Appeal decision in Nokia v Acer is just one example. There Arnold LJ held that Nokia had complied with its RAND obligations by offering an "Adjustable Licence" the terms of which provided for royalties to be determined later, by an arbitral tribunal. The decision may provide SEP holders with a potential alternative to litigating FRAND terms before the courts, although whether arbitration will ultimately play a greater role in resolving global FRAND disputes remains to be seen. 

To date, arbitration has often played a largely strategic role in SEP licensing negotiations. Parties usually prefer to preserve access to the remedies and certain procedures available through national courts and the UPC. However, interest in arbitration may increase as policymakers continue to emphasise consensual and efficient dispute resolution, whether through established institutions or newer forums such as the UPC's Patent Mediation and Arbitration Centre (PMAC).

Looking Ahead

As part of the next phase of its work, on 20 October 2026, the Government launched a call for evidence on the feasibility and design of a potential IPO-led FRAND Opinion Service. The exercise seeks stakeholder input on whether such a service could help parties independently assess whether SEP licence offers fall within a plausible FRAND range, reduce licensing frictions and improve access to dispute resolution, particularly for SMEs and less experienced participants in the SEP ecosystem. The call for evidence is open until 15 December 2026.