Date
The case was initiated on the grounds of several alleged violations, including Part 1 of Article 14.4 and Parts 1 and 2 of Article 14.6 of the Competition Law. The complexity of the complaint influenced the length of the proceedings, which lasted almost three years.
During the proceedings, the ABI group voluntarily withdrew its claims related to the alleged unfair registration of trademarks (Article 14.4 of the Competition Law). This was taken into account by the competition authority when issuing its dismissal decision regarding this aspect of the case.
Concerning the remaining allegations under Article 14.6, Antitrust Advisory presented detailed arguments highlighting the lack of evidence for the key elements of the alleged violation. In particular, with regard to the issue of similarity, evidence was provided demonstrating that Vladimirsky Standard had used a widely recognised packaging standard for sausages and meat products dating back to Soviet times (e.g., pink, burgundy, or brown packaging colours, twine, elongated/arched shapes, and other well-known elements). This, in turn, could not be interpreted as unfair behaviour. Additionally, sociological survey results were presented, showing that the majority of consumers perceive the high degree of similarity in traditional design elements and primarily base their purchasing decisions on the product names.
As a result, the competition authority dismissed all the claims against Vladimirsky Standard.
*The interests of Vladimirsky Standard were represented by Alexander Egorushkin, Anna Zabolotnykh, and Dmitry Lebedok.