Law: Competition Act, 2010

Section: 10

(a) Competition Act (XIX of 2010)--- ----S. 10---Deceptive marketing practices---Fraudulent use of anothers trademark---Scope---Complainant alleged that the respondent was involved in fraudulent use of his trademark, product labeling and packing/trade dress contested the allegations levelled against him---Validity---Trademark in question was registered by the complainant with the Intellectual Property Organization of Pakistan in 2004 and the complainant had been active in the relevant market since 2001---Competition Commission observed that on a cursory look from a consumer, the minimal difference in the name and logo of the complainant and respondent was not noticeable---Detailed and critical consideration might enable a consumer to spot the negligible differences, however, the similarity of the colour scheme, packaging, font and design was likely to allow average consumers to conclude that the products were in fact being produced by the same manufacturer---Artistic work of the logo and packaging/trade dress had significant resemblance with that of the complainant and was clearly copied---Conduct of respondent was held to be in violation of section 10(1) read with S. 10(2)(a) (d) of the Competition Act, 2010 was imposed upon a penalty and was directed to cease and desist from using the trademark of complainant. In the matter of violation of trademarks of DHL, 2013 CLD 1014 rel. (b) Competition Act (XIX of 2010)--- ----S. 10---Deceptive marketing practices---Fraudulent use of anothers trademark---Consent order---Scope---Complainant alleged that the respondent (other than the one mentioned in earlier paragraph) was involved in fraudulent use of his trademark, product labeling and packing/trade dress---Competition Commission, during the course of hearing, informed the parties that it was inclined towards a compliance-oriented approach and the purpose of S. 10, Competition Act, 2010, aimed at bringing about correction of behaviour rather than imposing penalties---Competition Complainant and respondent voluntarily showed their willingness to resolve the matter on the basis of mutual consent and desired for a consent order---Commission did not look into the merits…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492