ISLAMABAD, JULY 20, 2026: The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) has imposed Rs. 5 million penalty on M/s MCI-Bureau of Inspection & Certifications Pakistan, for fraudulently adopting a trademark and logo closely resembling that of Bureau Veritas, a France-based global leader in testing, inspection, and certification services, in violation of Section 10 of the Competition Act, 2010.
Bureau Veritas filed a complaint with CCP that MCI-Bureau of Inspection & Certifications Pakistan and MCI-Bureau of Inspection & Certifications United Kingdom had adopted a deceptively similar trade name and logo likely to mislead consumers into believing that its services were associated with the complainant.
After examining the evidence, the Commission concluded that the respondent had copied the dominant features of Bureau Veritas’ registered trademark and logo, including the word “Bureau” and other distinctive elements of the registered mark. Applying the well-established principles of “overall similarity” and “net general impression,” the Commission held that the similarities amounted to fraudulent use of another undertaking’s trademark under the Competition Act.
In accordance with these principles, it held that differences in colour scheme did not materially distinguish the respondent’s logo, particularly where inspection reports and certification documents are routinely reproduced in black and white and consumers do not ordinarily compare competing logos side by side.
The Commission found that MCI Bureau was aware of Bureau Veritas’s longstanding reputation and goodwill, and that its withdrawal of a trademark registration application after issuance of the CCP’s Show Cause Notice reinforced the inference that it recognised the similarity between the two marks.
The Commission also found that the Respondent failed to establish the expertise, technical competence and accreditation required for specialised certification services. It observed that its subsequent business, “Inspect Assure,” similarly lacked credible evidence of competence and accreditation, risking consumer deception.
Besides imposing the financial penalty, the Commission directed MCI-Bureau to cease using the complainant’s trademark, adopt a clearly distinguishable mark, obtain the requisite accreditation before offering certification services, and submit a compliance report within 60 days, failing which further penalties may apply.
The decision is not only about a copied trademark. It is about protecting consumers and legitimate businesses from deception, preserving confidence in testing, inspection and certification services that businesses, exporters and investors rely upon, and ensuring that undertakings cannot unfairly benefit from the reputation and goodwill of established international brands without the expertise, competence and accreditation those brands represent.
