header-logo header-logo

25 February 2026
Issue: 8151 / Categories: Legal News , Competition , Collective action , Consumer , Technology
printer mail-detail

Qualcomm class action dropped

Consumers’ association Which? has applied to withdraw from its five-year £480m class action against smartphone chipset provider Qualcomm, following an agreement between the parties

Under the agreement, Qualcomm will not make any payment to the class representative or the class.

Law firm Quinn Emanuel, acting for Qualcomm, said the class representative had concluded on the basis of evidence and argument that the Competition Appeal Tribunal would find Qualcomm did not coerce Apple, Apple’s chipset manufacturers or Samsung to sign any patent licences or chipset agreements, and did not infringe competition laws leading to inflated royalties and a price increase for consumers.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll