CCP imposes Rs5m penalty on firm

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s competition regulator has imposed Rs5 million penalty on a local inspection and certification firm after concluding that it deliberately adopted a name and logo closely resembling Bureau Veritas, the France-based global leader in testing, inspection and certification services. The ruling goes beyond a conventional trademark dispute. At its core is a question critical to exporters, manufacturers and consumers alike: whether a company presenting itself as a professional certification body possesses the expertise, accreditation and credibility it’s branding appears to promise. The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) found that MCI-Bureau of Inspection & Certifications Pakistan fraudulently used dominant features of Bureau Veritas’ registered trademark and logo, amounting to deceptive marketing in violation of Section 10 of the Competition Act, 2010. The proceedings stemmed from a complaint by Bureau Veritas, which alleged that the respondent had adopted a deceptively similar trade name and logo capable of misleading businesses and consumers into believing its services were associated with the French multinational. After examining the evidence, the Commission concluded that MCI-Bureau had copied the dominant features of Bureau Veritas’ registered mark, including the word “Bureau” and other distinctive design elements. Applying the established legal tests of “overall similarity” and “net general impression, ” the Commission held that the similarities amounted to fraudulent use of another undertaking’s trademark. It also rejected the respondent’s argument that differences in colour distinguished the two logos, observing that inspection reports and certification documents are frequently reproduced in black and white and that consumers do not ordinarily compare competing logos side by side. The CCP found that MCI-Bureau of Inspection & Certifications Pakistan fraudulently used dominant features of Bureau Veritas’ registered trademark and logo, amounting to deceptive marketing in violation of Section 10 of the Competition Act, 2010. Copyright Business Recorder, 2026

Read full story on Business Recorder