AIRLINK 170.57 Decreased By ▼ -2.58 (-1.49%)
BOP 11.18 Increased By ▲ 0.53 (4.98%)
CNERGY 8.41 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-1.29%)
CPHL 99.73 Increased By ▲ 2.27 (2.33%)
FCCL 46.60 Decreased By ▼ -0.65 (-1.38%)
FFL 15.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.27 (-1.75%)
FLYNG 27.55 Decreased By ▼ -0.58 (-2.06%)
HUBC 137.78 Decreased By ▼ -1.13 (-0.81%)
HUMNL 12.92 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (0.86%)
KEL 4.54 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
KOSM 5.36 Decreased By ▼ -0.19 (-3.42%)
MLCF 62.40 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (0.22%)
OGDC 212.16 Decreased By ▼ -2.59 (-1.21%)
PACE 5.42 Decreased By ▼ -0.13 (-2.34%)
PAEL 47.18 Increased By ▲ 2.32 (5.17%)
PIAHCLA 18.48 Decreased By ▼ -0.22 (-1.18%)
PIBTL 10.36 Decreased By ▼ -0.38 (-3.54%)
POWER 12.33 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.57%)
PPL 169.60 Decreased By ▼ -4.27 (-2.46%)
PRL 35.85 Decreased By ▼ -0.37 (-1.02%)
PTC 23.09 Decreased By ▼ -0.47 (-1.99%)
SEARL 96.26 Increased By ▲ 0.95 (1%)
SSGC 39.52 Increased By ▲ 0.39 (1%)
SYM 13.84 Decreased By ▼ -0.18 (-1.28%)
TELE 7.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-1.11%)
TPLP 10.03 Decreased By ▼ -0.26 (-2.53%)
TRG 63.48 Decreased By ▼ -1.20 (-1.86%)
WAVESAPP 9.99 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.5%)
WTL 1.31 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-1.5%)
YOUW 3.66 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-1.08%)
BR100 12,305 Decreased By -186.6 (-1.49%)
BR30 37,415 Decreased By -278.7 (-0.74%)
KSE100 114,853 Decreased By -1335.9 (-1.15%)
KSE30 35,217 Decreased By -533.1 (-1.49%)

ISLAMABAD: In a recent development, the Competition Appellate Tribunal (CAT) has dismissed the appeal filed by Eden Builders (Pvt) Ltd, upholding the decision of the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) regarding misleading advertising claims about their housing project.

In 2018, the CCP imposed a penalty of PKR 2.5 million on Eden Builders for deceptive marketing campaigns related to their ‘Eden Life Islamabad’ project, violating Section 10 of the Competition Act, 2010.

The CCP determined that Eden Builders’ claims were misleading. Specifically, their advertisement featured an illegible disclaimer about additional development charges not included in the quoted price, which was held misleading and tantamount to an omission of material price related information, thus violating Section 10 of the Competition Act.

The allusion in the advertisement of approval by CDA was also held to be a false and misleading claim, as there was no such approval.

Eden Builders filed an appeal against the CCP’s order before CAT. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal and upheld CCP’s order regarding Eden Builders’ violations of Section 10 of the Act.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.