Baş | Legal participated in the Competition Law Summit organised by Bahçeşehir University’s Competition Law Application and Research Centre and ELSA Istanbul on 10 October 2026. At the event, held at Bahçeşehir University’s Fazıl Say Hall, our partner Baran Baş discussed the relationship between intellectual property rights and competition law through the Turkish Competition Board’s Tetra Pak decision.
Prepared by Baran Baş and Gülce Korkmaz Erdem, LL.M., the presentation, “Can the Exercise of an Intellectual Property Right Constitute a Competition Law Infringement? The Turkish Competition Board’s Tetra Pak Decision,” explored the balance between protecting trademark and design rights and maintaining competitive markets.
The Tetra Pak decision: Intellectual property meets competition law
The presentation focused on the Turkish Competition Board’s Tetra Pak decision of 1 August 2024, numbered 24-32/758-319. The case examines the competitive effects of three-dimensional shape trademarks and design rights in the context of aseptic liquid food carton filling machines and the packaging used with them.
A central theme was the distinction between the existence of an intellectual property right and the way it is exercised in the market. The presentation considered the different questions addressed by judicial review of trademark registration and the Board’s assessment of market effects. This provided a framework for discussing the relationship between intellectual property protection and scrutiny of potentially abusive conduct by dominant undertakings.
Can exclusionary effects arise without an express tying clause?
One of the decision’s notable aspects is the Board’s finding of an effect equivalent to de facto tying, despite the absence of an express contractual obligation to purchase machinery and packaging together.
The presentation examined the interaction between the exercise of trademark and design rights, contractual provisions allocating responsibility for packaging sourced from alternative suppliers, and the costs of switching to different packaging formats. The discussion focused on whether customers could effectively exercise the freedom of choice available to them under their contracts.
The limits of intervention: Remedies, dissenting opinions and alternatives
The presentation addressed both the Board’s majority reasoning and the dissenting opinions. Requirements to renounce certain trademark and design rights and withdraw certain applications were considered in the context of the scope of competition law intervention.
This raised the distinction between regulating the exercise of a right and intervening in its continued existence. The discussion explored that distinction through incentives to innovate, opportunities for market entry and alternative enforcement tools. The dissenting opinions and proposals discussed in the investigation report provided further perspectives on the legal questions arising from the decision.
EU practice and recent developments
The comparative part of the presentation considered the EU’s Tetra Pak I and Tetra Pak II cases, together with the European Commission’s 2026 Guidelines on abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings.
It also addressed the European Commission’s Teva decision and the Turkish Competition Authority’s Teva investigation announced on 21 August 2026. These developments formed part of a broader discussion of patent procedures and conduct concerning competing products. The Turkish proceedings were presented as an investigation, rather than a finding of infringement.
Access the presentation
We are sharing the complete 16-page presentation in its original Turkish version, including the case illustrations, source references, and comparative analysis used at the event.
We thank Prof. Dr. Zafer Kahraman, Nur Şura Öz, LL.M., Eymen Özkan, and the organising team, as well as the session moderator, fellow panellists, and participants, for a productive exchange.