In increasingly competitive consumer markets, brand owners are no longer competing solely on names and logos. The visual appearance of a product, including its packaging and overall get-up, often plays a decisive role in consumer recognition and purchasing decisions. While the UAE provides for unfair competition and misleading conduct-type claims, reliance on unregistered rights in this respect can be complex, evidence heavy, and uncertain. This makes securing registered protection for product packaging an essential component of brand protection in the UAE.

Packaging and get-up as valuable brand assets

Packaging serves a dual function. It is both functional and a powerful branding tool. Distinctive shapes, colour combinations, layouts, and visual cues can become synonymous with a particular source.

For core products in particular, where market recognition is high, the packaging itself can carry significant commercial value. This makes it an attractive target for competitors or bad faith actors seeking to benefit from an established brand’s success without making the same investment in brand development. The rise of lookalike, or “dupe”, products has only exacerbated this risk, as competitors or bad faith actors adopt similar visual identities while avoiding direct copying of registered word or logo marks.

Limitations of unregistered rights and unfair competition claims in the UAE

In many other jurisdictions, brand owners rely on passing off both as a standalone claim to protect unregistered rights (including packaging and/or get-up) and as a wider fallback cause of action. While passing off is not strictly available in the UAE, broadly similar outcomes may potentially be pursued via unfair competition and misleading and deceptive conduct principles under UAE law.

Article 62 of Federal Decree Law No. 50 of 2022 Concerning Promulgating the Commercial Transactions Law prohibits traders from making false statements related to the origin, specifications or other important characteristics of their goods. It also prohibits traders from falsely claiming to have received awards, certifications, or recognition, or from using other misleading methods to attract customers away from competitors. Traders engaging in such conduct may be liable for compensating any resulting damages.

Article 63 of the same law prohibits traders from using fraudulent or deceptive practices in selling their goods or spreading false information that may harm a competitor’s interest, or such traders may be liable for compensating any resulting damages.

Beyond the local Commercial Transactions Law, similar protections are provided under the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (Paris Convention), which has been acceded to and is in force in the UAE.

Article 10bis of the Paris Convention requires member countries to provide effective protection against unfair competition. It defines unfair competition as any act that is contrary to honest commercial practices and, in particular, prohibits conduct that creates confusion with a competitor’s business or products, damages a competitor’s reputation through false statements, or misleads consumers about the nature, characteristics, quality, or origin of goods.

While these provisions collectively provide a framework to challenge imitation, reliance on them in practice is often burdensome and unpredictable. Unlike registered rights, they do not provide a clear, self-standing basis for enforcement. Instead, they require collecting and presenting evidence of use and market presence, as well as demonstrating how the competing packaging may mislead or confuse consumers.

This creates several practical difficulties. The evidentiary exercise can be extensive, requiring documentation of historical use, consistency of presentation, and market exposure. Outcomes are less predictable, particularly where competitors introduce minor variations to their packaging. In addition, pursuing such claims often involves greater time and cost, especially if matters progress beyond administrative channels into court proceedings.

These challenges are compounded in the UAE’s largely first-to-file system. A third party may secure registration for overlapping or imitative packaging elements, thereby obtaining formal rights that can be asserted against you. This can disrupt ongoing use, complicate your ability to register your own packaging, and place you in a defensive position from an enforcement perspective.

Similarly, trade mark oppositions before the UAE Trade Mark Office are more straightforward when based on existing registrations, and authorities tend to readily fixate on the recorded and registered rights at this level, often leaving more nuanced decision making to the court appeal stage, which in turn requires significant evidentiary effort and procedural investment.

In this context, reliance on unregistered, use-based rights is not only more difficult, but also strategically weaker, particularly where competitors are actively seeking to formalise their positions through registration.

Advantages of registering packaging as trade marks

Registering packaging and get-up as trade marks provides a clear and enforceable legal framework. Where the packaging is sufficiently distinctive, it may be protected as a three-dimensional mark or as a figurative mark representing its visual appearance.

Registration offers several advantages: it creates a presumption of ownership and validity, simplifying enforcement; enables swift administrative action against infringing goods, including seizure and takedown measures; and strengthens the brand owner’s position in opposition proceedings against later filings that seek to replicate similar visual elements.

Importantly, registered protection can serve as a deterrent. Competitors are less likely to adopt similar packaging where clear rights exist, reducing the likelihood of disputes arising in the first place.

Addressing the rise of dupe culture

The growing prevalence of dupe products highlights the need for a robust protection strategy. These products often mimic the overall look and feel of successful brands while avoiding direct replication of registered marks. In the absence of protection for packaging, such practices can erode brand value and consumer trust.

By securing registered rights in key visual elements, businesses can challenge these imitations more effectively. Even where differences exist, the overall similarity in appearance may be sufficient to support enforcement where the protected features are clearly defined within a registration.

Conclusion: Takeaways

In the UAE, while unfair competition and misleading conduct claims may potentially provide a pathway to challenge imitation, they are not a substitute for registered rights. The cost, evidentiary burden, and unpredictability associated with such claims make them a less reliable foundation for enforcement.

For core products in particular, packaging and get-up should be treated as primary brand assets requiring dedicated protection. Securing trade mark registrations for these elements not only strengthens enforcement options but also mitigates the risk of third parties obtaining conflicting rights in a largely first-to-file system.

Businesses that take early steps to protect how their products look, and not only what they are called, place themselves in a significantly stronger position to maintain market presence, prevent imitation, and avoid being drawn into reactive and resource-intensive disputes.