The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) has imposed a penalty of Rs. 150 million on Mezan Beverages (Private) Limited for deceptive marketing practices, after finding that the company’s “Storm” energy drink closely imitated the packaging and trade dress of PepsiCo’s Sting energy drink.
In its order, the CCP concluded that Mezan’s Storm energy drink 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 Commission held that such conduct amounted to parasitic copying and constituted deceptive marketing, in violation of Section 10 of the Competition Act, 2010.
The case originated in 2018 when PepsiCo Inc. filed a complaint, alleging that Mezan’s Storm energy drink was designed to benefit from the goodwill of Sting by imitating its appearance. Instead of addressing the allegations, Mezan repeatedly challenged the CCP’s jurisdiction and initiated prolonged litigation, obtaining stay orders from the Lahore High Court in 2018 and 2021, which delayed the inquiry for several years.
In June 2024, the Lahore High Court dismissed Mezan’s petition, upheld the CCP’s authority, and clarified that early challenges to show-cause notices were not maintainable. The Court also noted that proceedings under the Competition Act are distinct from trademark cases and observed that Mezan had used litigation to delay regulatory action.
The CCP’s detailed order found that Mezan’s Storm energy drink adopted a red-dominant colour scheme identical to Sting, bold slanted white lettering with aggressive visual motifs, a near-identical bottle shape, and branding elements likely to mislead ordinary consumers. The Commission emphasized that deception is assessed based on the overall commercial impression, not minor differences.
While Mezan held a registered trademark for “Storm,” the CCP ruled that trademark registration does not provide immunity from competition law where consumer deception and passing-off are established.
The Commission, while imposing the Rs. 150 million penalty, stated that copycat branding and misleading packaging will not be tolerated, regardless of the size or local status of the company.