The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) has imposed a total penalty of Rs5.5 million on seven veterinary medicine manufacturers for using brand names and packaging that were identical or deceptively similar to the registered “COLCOREX” trademark, in violation of the Competition Act, 2010.
The case was initiated following a complaint filed by Shahujee Herbal Pharma, which stated that it has marketed veterinary herbal medicine under the COLCOREX brand since 1999. The company registered the trademark with the Intellectual Property Organization (IPO) of Pakistan in 2017.
According to the complaint, several manufacturers marketed similar veterinary products under brand names such as COLCOREX FORTE, TM-CALCOREX, CALCOREX-C, CALCOJEX, COLCOREX-M, CALCOREX-T, COLCOREX-V, GOLD COLCOREX, AR CALCOREX, SUPER COLCOREX, COLCORX LIQUID, and HI-CALCOREX.
After reviewing the case, the CCP concluded that the disputed brands reproduced the registered trademark either entirely or with only minor spelling changes, prefixes, or suffixes. The Commission also found that several companies used similar color schemes, typography, taglines, and packaging, creating an overall appearance that could mislead ordinary consumers into believing the products were associated with the original trademark owner.
The Commission imposed Rs1 million fines each on Atzan Natural Products, Muslim Herbal and Nutraceuticals, S-Asia Oriental Pharma, and Izfaar Nutraceuticals Industries. It also fined HerBBeck Nutraceuticals, Vital Mark Laboratories (Pvt.) Limited, and Hi-Vet Nutraceuticals Pharma Rs500,000 each.
Proceedings against Blessco International were dismissed after the Commission found insufficient evidence linking the company to the manufacture or sale of the disputed products.
The CCP clarified that product enlistment by the Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan (DRAP) does not authorize the use of another company’s registered trademark or limit the Commission’s authority to investigate deceptive marketing practices. It noted that DRAP, the Intellectual Property Organization, and the CCP each operate under separate legal mandates.
Referring to Supreme Court rulings, the Commission stated that minor changes such as adding prefixes or suffixes, altering a single letter, or making slight packaging modifications do not create a distinct trademark if the overall commercial impression remains deceptively similar.
The CCP directed all penalized companies to immediately stop using the disputed trademarks, revise all related packaging and promotional materials across all media platforms, and submit compliance reports within 30 days.
The Commission warned that failure to comply with its directives would result in an additional penalty of Rs100,000 per day until compliance is achieved.
