In Uzbekistan, the competition authority has sided with an importer of genuine goods in a dispute in which a local company registered another business’s brand as its own trademark and used that registration against a competitor. The matter concerns unfair competition case No. 1-10-2026/222, in which the importer Ozod2020 LLC was represented by the Tashkent law firm LOYAL Legal Advisory.
Since December 2020, Ozod2020 LLC has imported genuine Canadian Golden Maple sausages into Uzbekistan. In 2023, another local company, Falcon Capital LLC, registered the Golden Maple designation as its own trademark under certificate MGU 50436 in Class 29 of the Nice Classification. However, Falcon Capital is not the manufacturer of these products.
Falcon Capital subsequently entered the trademark in the customs register, after which the customs authorities suspended the release of consignments imported by Ozod2020. In effect, an importer that had lawfully supplied genuine products for several years was being pushed out of the market.
The case differs from a typical parallel import dispute. In such disputes, the objection usually comes from the foreign rights holder or its authorized distributor, and the key issue is the exhaustion of trademark rights. In this case, the foreign manufacturer raised no objections. Instead, a local company registered another business’s brand in its own name and used that registration against a competitor importing the same genuine products. Falcon Capital’s conduct therefore had to be assessed not only from the standpoint of formal trademark rights but also from the perspective of competition law.
On September 30, 2026, the Tashkent City Territorial Department of the Committee for the Development of Competition and Protection of Consumer Rights found that Falcon Capital had violated the first and seventh paragraphs of Part 1 of Article 21 of the Law “On Competition”. These provisions prohibit unfair competition and conduct that obstructs a competitor’s entry into the market or forces it out of the market.
The Committee noted that Falcon Capital had not substantiated the manufacture and sale of its own Golden Maple products on the domestic market. The company was ordered to cease the infringement. In addition, a fine equal to 2% of the revenue from sales of Golden Maple products during the infringement period was recommended.
The case demonstrates that trademark registration does not give its owner an unlimited right to block competitors. Where a company registers another business’s brand and uses the registration to keep genuine products off the market, the competition authority may classify such conduct as unfair competition. For importers, proceedings before the competition authority can be an important means of protection alongside a challenge to the trademark registration itself.