A recent case at the Myanmar Competition Commission has set a significant precedent in the country’s approach to unfair competition practices. The case, involving a Thai manufacturer of cement grout and tile adhesive products and a local Myanmar producer, highlighted the Commission’s willingness to address issues of deceptive marketing and unfair competition.
Background
The case centered around a Thai manufacturer who has been distributing their cement grout and tile adhesive products in Myanmar for many years through local distribution agents. The company had established a well-known brand and a strong reputation for quality in the Myanmar market.
In recent years, the Thai company discovered that a local individual in Myanmar was manufacturing and selling similar products with packaging nearly identical to their own. The local producer was using the same mark device, color, and packaging design themes, and the products contained deceptive information.
Legal Proceedings
After an initial cease-and-desist letter failed to resolve the issue, a complaint was submitted to the Myanmar Competition Commission. The case was notable because the Commission typically does not address issues of copying designs, marks, colors, or packaging themes. However, the complaint emphasized that the local individual was misleading customers and competing unfairly by using deceptive information and copying distinctive designs and themes.
Lawyers from Tilleke & Gibbins, representing the Thai manufacturer, provided extensive documentation proving their client’s long-standing presence in the Myanmar market and the local individual’s deceptive practices. The Commission’s Investigation Committee conducted a thorough investigation, including market surveys and hearings involving both parties.
Commission’s Decision
After nearly a year of deliberation, on July 4, 2024, the Decision-Making Committee of the Myanmar Competition Commission ruled in favor of the Thai manufacturer. The decision required the local individual to:
- Immediately cease the production and distribution of cement grout and tile adhesive products bearing similar color and design themes to the Thai company’s products.
- Change their packaging design to avoid any similarity with the Thai company’s products.
Significance of the Ruling
This case marks a significant development in Myanmar’s approach to competition law. It demonstrates the Competition Commission’s willingness to address unfair competition practices that go beyond traditional antitrust concerns, extending to issues of deceptive marketing and brand imitation.
The ruling sets a precedent that could have far-reaching implications for both local and international businesses operating in Myanmar. It signals that the Commission is prepared to take action against unfair competition practices, even when they involve complex issues of brand identity and packaging design.
Conclusion
This landmark case at the Myanmar Competition Commission highlights the evolving nature of competition law in the country. It underscores the importance for businesses to be aware of and comply with fair competition practices, not just in pricing and market share, but also in branding and marketing strategies. As Myanmar’s business landscape continues to develop, such rulings will play a crucial role in shaping a fair and competitive market environment.
