In its first article, the law defined commercial fraud as deceiving the dealer by any means whatsoever — by substituting or altering the nature of goods, their quantity, kind, price, essential qualities, origin, source, or validity, or by providing incorrect or misleading commercial data about the promoted products or any other matter relating to them that leads to deceiving the dealer. The law also distinguished three types of infringing goods:

The law also defined the supplier as any natural or legal person who imports, exports, re-exports, manufactures, produces, markets, circulates, promotes, sells, possesses, stores, transports, or displays goods, while the dealer is the person who purchases the goods.

Article 2 set out three main objectives: combating activities of counterfeiting original goods and commercial fraud in all their forms and types; establishing the mechanisms, controls, and procedures to prevent trade in counterfeit, adulterated, and spoiled goods; and creating a lawful commercial environment that encourages the protection of intellectual property rights.

Article 4 prohibited importing, exporting, producing, manufacturing, displaying, selling, storing, transporting, marketing, circulating, promoting, disposing of, or possessing for sale adulterated, spoiled, or counterfeit goods, and prohibited any attempt to do so. A violator is anyone who commits, participates in, or attempts any of the following acts:

• Importing and circulating knowinglyImporting adulterated, spoiled, or counterfeit goods or materials designated for such purposes with intent to commit commercial fraud, or exporting, re-exporting, manufacturing, producing, selling, storing, or transporting them knowingly.
• Deceiving as to the goods’ specificationsDeception, fraud, or counterfeiting in the type, number, quantity, measurement, weight, capacity, calibre, identity, reality, nature, qualities, components, origin, source, composition, or expiry date of the goods.
• Possession for marketingPossessing, directly or through others, with intent to market, circulate, promote, or display adulterated, spoiled, or counterfeit goods for sale, or materials for adulterating or counterfeiting goods.
• Preparation and packaging toolsUsing vessels, containers, wrappings, packaging, labels, or printed matter in preparing goods intended for sale, or packing, wrapping, bundling, distributing, storing, or transporting the infringing goods.
• False description and misleading advertisingDescribing, advertising, or displaying the goods in a manner containing false, deceptive, or misleading data.

Article 8 requires the supplier to provide the competent authority or the Ministry, as the case may be, with the mandatory commercial books or their equivalent showing the commercial data of the goods owned or held, their value, and all supporting documents and invoices upon request, and to place on the goods identification labels or any information showing the product’s components and how to use, maintain, or store it in accordance with applicable laws. Article 5 also requires the supplier to withdraw the infringing goods from markets and warehouses, whether on its own initiative or upon order of the competent authority, while bearing the costs of withdrawal, disposal, destruction, or return to source.

The law took into account the rights of the good-faith buyer. Article 7 provided that the supplier is obliged to refund the value of adulterated, spoiled, or counterfeit goods, or to replace or change them according to the wish of the good-faith dealer, without prejudice to the dealer’s right to claim compensation. This gives the consumer a civil avenue for redress alongside the punitive track against the violator.

Under Article 9, employees designated by a decision of the Minister of Justice in agreement with the Minister of Economy or the head of the local judicial body, as the case may be, hold the capacity of judicial enforcement officers in establishing violations of the law and its executive regulation. Article 10 granted them broad powers:

Article 11 prohibited preventing judicial enforcement officers from performing their work, and prohibited the supplier from disposing of goods placed under precautionary hold before the examination result clears them.

Article 12 allowed a supplier whose goods were seized or placed under hold to apply to the competent court for release. The court may order release within (24) hours of the application, subject to conditions: that the supplier shows the goods are perishable or quick to spoil, that samples have been taken for examination, and that the court is satisfied there is no danger to public health. Goods are also released if the competent court does not issue an order confirming the hold within the (45) forty-five days following the day of seizure, provided this period does not exceed (20) twenty days for goods liable to rapid spoilage or perishing.

Article 13 permitted, by a reasoned decision of the Minister or his delegate or the head of the local authority or his delegate, in cases of necessity or urgency and where there are strong indications of adulterated, spoiled, or counterfeit goods at the supplier, the closure of the premises or place where the offence occurred — provided the matter is referred to the competent court within (10) ten working days of the decision to confirm or revoke the closure, failing which the decision is deemed void.

Article 14 established a committee called the “Higher Committee for Combating Commercial Fraud,” affiliated with the Minister of Economy. Its formation and the determination of its work system and competences are issued by a Cabinet decision upon the Minister’s proposal in coordination with the competent authorities. That is, the Committee’s detailed competences are determined later by a regulatory Cabinet decision.

Article 16 provided that — without prejudice to any harsher penalty stipulated by any other law — the offences set out in the law are punished by the penalties prescribed therein. The penalties are graduated according to the gravity of the act:

In addition, Article 19 obliges the competent court — without prejudice to the rights of good-faith third parties — to order the confiscation or destruction of the infringing goods, drugs, produce, products, materials, and tools used, and to publish a summary of the final conviction judgment in two local daily newspapers, one in Arabic, at the convicted person’s expense; the court may order closure of the premises for up to (6) six months. Article 20 also penalised the person in charge of the actual management of the legal person with the same penalty if their knowledge of the offence was established and they failed to take the necessary measures, and rendered them jointly liable for the fines.

Article 22 allowed the Ministry or the competent authority, as the case may be, to conduct reconciliation over any act violating the law and its executive regulation upon the violator’s request, in return for payment of an amount no less than twice the minimum fine to which the violator is liable under the administrative penalties regulation. The executive regulation determines the procedures and controls for reconciliation.

Article 23 organised the avenue of objection. It allowed any interested party to submit a written grievance to the Minister or the head of the competent authority against any decision issued under the law within (15) fifteen working days of notification. The grievance is decided within (30) thirty days and the decision is final; failure to respond within the period is deemed a rejection. An appeal may then be filed before the competent court within (30) thirty days of notification of the grievance rejection or the lapse of the decision period. In all cases, no appeal may be filed before the court except after grieving the decision.

Article 24 repealed Federal Law No. (19) of 2016 on Combating Commercial Fraud and every provision contradicting the new decree-law, while the regulations and decisions issued under the repealed law continue to apply insofar as they do not conflict with the decree-law, until replacements are issued. Article 25 required the Cabinet to issue the executive regulation and the decisions necessary to implement its provisions within (6) six months of the date it comes into force. Article 26 provided for the publication of the decree-law in the Official Gazette and its entry into force two months after publication.

• Federal Decree-Law No. (42) of 2023 on Combating Commercial Fraud.Federal Decree-Law
• Federal Law No. (19) of 2016 on Combating Commercial Fraud (repealed by Decree-Law No. 42 of 2023).Federal Law (repealed)