Table of Contents
- Introduction
- Case Background
- Commission’s Action
- Appellate Tribunal’s Verdict
- Arguments in Supreme Court
- Supreme Court’s Judgment
- Conclusion
- Need Legal Help? Contact Muhammad Amin Advocate
Introduction
The Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled against Options International (SMC-Pvt.) Ltd. The company had used the Starbucks name and logo without permission. This case involved trademark misuse and unfair business practices.
Case Background
Starbucks Corporation USA owns the name and logo. It registered both trademarks in Pakistan and internationally. However, it has no physical outlets in Pakistan and has not allowed anyone to use its brand locally.
Despite this, Options International used the Starbucks brand to sell its own products. Starbucks filed a complaint with the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP).
Commission’s Action
The Commission investigated the complaint. It found that Options International misused the trademark. It imposed a fine of Rs. 5 million. Additionally, it ordered a daily penalty of Rs. 100,000 for non-compliance.
Options International challenged this order before the Competition Appellate Tribunal.
Appellate Tribunal’s Verdict
The Tribunal partially accepted the appeal. It increased the main fine to Rs. 6 million but reduced the daily penalty to Rs. 5,000. The daily penalty applied from 3rd December 2021, the date when the Tribunal started functioning.
Still unsatisfied, Options International filed an appeal in the Supreme Court.
Arguments in Supreme Court
Counsel for the appellant argued that the Competition Act, 2010 applied only where actual competition exists within Pakistan. He claimed that since Starbucks has no outlets in Pakistan, no competition exists between the two parties.
He also conceded that Starbucks has valid trademark registration in Pakistan and abroad.
Supreme Court’s Judgment
The Court rejected the argument. It ruled that using a famous brand name misleads the public. Consumers could believe they were buying original Starbucks products.
This practice harms local businesses. A small vendor cannot compete with a fake international brand. The Court said such misuse distorts fair competition in Pakistan.
The Court asked the appellant whether the law allowed such penalties. The counsel admitted that Section 38 of the Competition Act does allow this. Hence, the Court upheld the penalties.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. However, it made no order for costs since Starbucks Corporation USA did not appear in court. The Court sent a copy of the judgment to Starbucks for their record.
Need Legal Help? Contact Muhammad Amin Advocate
If you need expert legal advice on trademark issues, competition law, or corporate cases, contact:
Muhammad Amin, Advocate
📍 Office No. 14, Zeb Plaza, University Road, Tahkal Payan, Peshawar
📞 Phone: 0313 9708019
He provides trusted legal services both in Pakistan and to clients worldwide through online platforms.