Mezan Beverages fined Rs150mn for imitating Pepsi’s Sting energy drink
- CCP order concludes that such conduct “amounted to parasitic copying and constituted deceptive marketing prohibited under Pakistan’s competition law”
The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) has imposed a penalty of Rs150 million on Mezan Beverages (Private) Limited, which was found to have imitated the packaging and trade dress of PepsiCo’s Sting energy drink, thereby engaging in deceptive marketing practices in violation of Section 10 of the Competition Act, 2010.
According to a released on Friday, the commission held that Mezan’s “Storm” energy drink fraudulently copied the overall look, feel, colour scheme, bottle design, and branding elements of Sting, creating a likelihood of consumer confusion at the point of sale.
The order concluded that such conduct “amounted to parasitic copying and constituted deceptive marketing prohibited under Pakistan’s competition law”.
Legal history
According to the CCP, the case dates back to 2018, when PepsiCo Inc. filed a complaint alleging that Mezan’s ‘Storm’ energy drink was designed to imitate ‘Sting’ and benefit from PepsiCo’s goodwill.
CCP said that Mezan, instead of responding on merits, repeatedly challenged CCP’s jurisdiction and initiated prolonged litigation. Mezan obtained stay orders from the Lahore High Court in 2018 and 2021, delaying the inquiry for several years.
In June 2024, the Lahore High Court dismissed Mezan’s petition, upheld the CCP’s authority, and ruled that early challenges to show-cause notices were not maintainable. The LHC also clarified that proceedings under the Competition Act are separate from trademark cases. The court ruled that challenging a show-cause notice at an early stage was not maintainable and observed that Mezan had used litigation to delay regulatory proceedings.
Findings of deceptive marketing
In its detailed order, the CCP found that Mezan’s ‘Storm’ energy drink adopted:
- A red-dominant colour scheme identical to Sting
- Bold, slanted white lettering with aggressive visual motifs
- Near-identical bottle shape and presentation
- Branding elements are likely to mislead an ordinary consumer with imperfect recollection
The commission emphasised that deception is assessed based on the overall commercial impression, not minute differences examined side by side.
Even though Mezan held a registered trademark for ‘Storm’, the CCP ruled that trademark registration does not grant immunity from competition law where consumer deception and passing-off are established.
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.