Law: Competition Act, 2010

Section: XIX,10(2)(a),10(2)(b)

(a)    Competition Act (XIX of 2010)-------Ss. 10(2)(a) & 10(2)(b)---Deceptive marketing practice---Determination---Net General Impression Test---Scope---While evaluating "net general impression" or dominant message, the Commission examines express and implied claims contained in an advertisement or promotional campaign and holds the advertiser liable for the both---Advertiser is liable for all such claims if the same are false and / or misleading or lack a reasonable basis.M/s Eden Builders (Private) Limited (File No. 191/OFT/Eden Life/CCP/2015) rel.(b)    Competition Act (XIX of 2010)-------Ss. 10(2)(b) & 10(2)(b)---Deceptive marketing practice---False statement--Misleading claim---Show-cause notice was issued to respondent-establishment for making false claims about the housing scheme launched by it---Validity--Respondent-establishment's false claim of being associated with initiatives of Punjab and Federal Government for the provision of low cost housing in Islamabad was likely to attract investors and consumers to invest in the project of respondentestablishment when they might have otherwise considered other competing projects without such a misleading government endorsement---Rather than competing with other similar undertakings on merit, respondent-establishment adopted a strategy to influence consumers' choice by deception regarding government endorsement and geographical location of its project---Respondent-establishment had put itself forward by marketing its project as being sanctioned by government and giving the impression that the same was situated in Islamabad---This might have had the effect of distorting competition within Pakistan because other housing societies marketing similar projects would be at a serious disadvantage and might not able to compete with respondent-establishment as unsuspecting public would believe, understand or perceive respondent-establishments' project to be genuinely backed by government and located in Islamabad---Competition Commission imposed penalty upon respondent-establishment for violation of S. 10(2)(b) of Competition Act, 2010---Competition Commission directed…