- within International Law, Technology and Intellectual Property topic(s)
- in European Union
- with readers working within the Pharmaceuticals & BioTech and Law Firm industries
Over the past several years, the issue of parallel imports has remained a recurring subject in submissions made by international companies to the country's leadership and the Ministry of Justice, and has also been raised at industry conferences and reflected in briefing notes and analytical materials addressed to the Government of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
Complaints are being raised across a wide range of sectors, from fast-moving consumer goods and electronics to pharmaceuticals and medical equipment. Their substance remains the same: official distributors and right holders are facing the systematic importation into Uzbekistan of their products through channels that have not been authorized by them, i.e., by parallel importers.
An analysis of even a limited sample of customs documents relating to such shipments, provided to the editorial team, revealed a consistent pattern: the declared value of goods imported through grey channels differs substantially from that of official shipments, regardless of the route or shipment volume.
This raises questions that go beyond purely legal issues and concern the broader business environment as a whole.
For the preparation of this article, the editorial team interviewed Muhammadali Makhmudov, one of the leading experts in the field of intellectual property law and a representative of a number of international right holders. A summary of the key points from our discussion is set out below.
Parallel imports is the importation of goods without the consent of the right holder. In other words, it bypasses the established system of control over quality, origin, labeling, distribution, and supplier responsibility. Within Uzbekistan's legal framework, such an approach is not merely improper — it is contrary to the existing logic of trademark protection and the state policy on the protection of intellectual property.
What the Law Says
Article 26 of the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin" provides that the unauthorized importation of goods bearing a trademark constitutes an infringement of the right holder's exclusive rights.
The exception to this rule is formulated very clearly: the use of a trademark is not deemed an infringement where the goods in question were lawfully placed into civil circulation in Uzbekistan directly by the trademark owner or with its consent, since the territorial scope of both the Law and the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan is the Republic of Uzbekistan itself, rather than the country from which the goods are imported.
It is precisely from this legal framework that the conclusion is drawn that Uzbekistan follows the national principle of exhaustion of rights. The same approach is supported by the antimonopoly authority and the Ministry of Justice: the unauthorized importation of original goods bearing the right holder's trademark infringes the rights of the trademark owner. (The editorial team has written positions of these authorities at its disposal.)
It is important to understand that major international right holders do not merely passively rely on legal protection by registering their trademarks. They actively record their trademarks in Uzbekistan's customs register and consistently take action to prevent unauthorized imports, including through court proceedings.
Open sources show that among the companies that have recorded their trademarks in the customs register and are actively engaged in combating grey imports are such global brands as Samsung, Shell, AstraZeneca, Mars, Ferrero, Pernod Ricard, and a number of others.
This is not a random choice: such companies bear the greatest reputational and legal risks if products reach the market under their brands outside their official supply channels.
The recording of a trademark in the customs register is, to a certain extent, an indication that the manufacturer has assumed responsibility for the quality and safety of the goods on the Uzbek market, has established an official distribution channel, and bears obligations toward regulators and consumers. Anyone importing goods outside that channel assumes none of the manufacturer's obligations.
The Customs Aspect
Quite often, one of the key economic incentives for a parallel importer, without which the justification for and support of "grey" imports would make little sense, is the understatement of the customs value of the goods. A grey channel is profitable, among other things, because it makes it possible to minimize customs duties and VAT upon import: goods may be declared at an undervalued price, routed through a jurisdiction with a preferential control regime or through an intermediary company, certificates of origin from third countries may be used, and so on.
The above statement does not mean that all parallel importers are acting in bad faith or are violators; however, when discussing parallel imports, this aspect of the issue cannot be overlooked.
In certain cases, the price difference between "grey" goods, i.e., goods imported through parallel channels, and officially supplied goods is to a large extent a difference in customs duties and other import charges that have been paid — or not paid. Such an approach violates the principles of fair competition and places the official authorized distributor at a competitive disadvantage compared with market participants declaring goods at substantially lower values.
This can also be seen from the analytical information and primary documents provided by Ferrero's official distributor in Uzbekistan (brands including Kinder, Ferrero, Nutella, Tic Tac, and Raffaello).
Accordingly, right holders' efforts to combat parallel imports are, at the same time, efforts to combat customs abuses and shadow trade. Companies that record their trademarks in the customs register and apply to the courts are, in effect, supporting the State's tax policy by bringing undervaluation schemes to light and disrupting grey logistics chains. The real question is whether officials of the competent authorities are genuinely willing to see these schemes — but that is more a subject for a separate discussion.
The State's Position: From the President to Inpidual Ministrie
The President of the country has publicly stated that the protection of intellectual property has been strengthened, administrative liability has been tightened, criminal liability has been introduced, an ex officio procedure has been implemented in the customs sphere, and a mechanism for the destruction of counterfeit goods is in place. Certain presidential acts also provide for a systematic and effective fight against the production and circulation of counterfeit goods and against infringements of intellectual property rights.
An analysis of the Head of State's statements and official acts leads to a clear conclusion: the policy is not to weaken, but to strengthen the protection of intellectual property and to suppress grey and counterfeit channels.
Furthermore, one can hardly disagree with the position of the Ministry of Health of Uzbekistan, which, in its letter dated from March 13, 2026, expressly defined parallel imports, using medicinal products as an example, as importation without the direct consent of the right holder and pointed to the negative consequences of its legalization: an increase in the share of low-quality and falsified products, weaker authenticity control, disruption of the cold chain, and difficulties in identifying the party responsible for any harm that may result. The Ministry rightly considered the introduction of such a mechanism to be inadvisable, and we have the relevant supporting documents to that effect.
In my view, against this background, efforts to justify and support parallel imports do not appear to be support for reform, but rather an attempt to steer the State's policy in the opposite direction.
Consumer Safety
Consumers need more than simply a product bearing "the same brand or originating from the same manufacturer." They need a product that is safe, properly labeled, traceable, stored and transported in compliance with applicable requirements, and capable of being promptly withdrawn and recalled from the market if a defect is identified.
The Law "On Consumer Protection" expressly guarantees the right to safe goods, and manufacturers and sellers are obliged, upon identifying a risk, to immediately suspend sales and take measures to withdraw the goods from circulation.
Against whom is a claim to be brought — the importer, who may disappear tomorrow, or the manufacturer, which did not place this shipment into circulation in Uzbekistan and did not control its logistics?
A clear chain of responsibility, control over storage conditions, and the handling of complaints and claims — all of these are among the first areas placed at risk by parallel imports.
In 2026, one of the world's largest nutrition manufacturers initiated a recall of certain batches of infant formula due to a health risk identified in a timely manner by the company itself. According to Reuters, the recall affected products in dozens of countries. The mechanism worked as follows: the manufacturer identified the affected batches, alerted the market, and regulators and retailers received official notifications, after which the unsafe products were withdrawn.
All of this would have been impossible to carry out in Uzbekistan if those goods had been imported through parallel channels.
In other words, in real life, parallel imports do not mean simply "the same product at a lower price," but rather a product carrying a heightened risk of non-compliance with the mandatory requirements governing circulation on the domestic market.
Investment Climate
For a country interested in developing domestic production, import substitution, and high-quality foreign investment, parallel imports send an unmistakably troubling signal to investors.
The possibility of parallel imports conveys a non-ambiguous message to an investor: invest in Uzbekistan, build official distribution networks, but the results of your investment may be undermined by those who simply import your own goods through grey channels and then free-ride on your trademark and reputation.
Such practices were not uncommon in the "old Uzbekistan," but attempts to turn them into a norm again do not contribute either to the implementation of the political will to accede to the WTO or to compliance with the commitments undertaken by the country's leadership in this area.
The Risk of Diluting the Law at the Enforcement Level
Foreign right holders note that the risk today lies not in the absence of a legal prohibition on parallel imports, but in attempts to dilute its substance at the level of enforcement, through ambiguous interpretation by the courts and other competent authorities.
In Conclusion
The country is faced not only with an economic choice, but also with a legal and political one.
The first path for Uzbekistan to remain consistent: trademarks are protected, unauthorized imports are prevented, the rights of right holders and official importers are safeguarded, consumers receive safe and traceable goods, and the State budget receives substantial customs revenue without undervaluation of the customs value — which, in some cases, is precisely the main incentive and economic foundation for parallel importers.
The second option is the creation of a regime in which grey imports receive de facto protection, while the law and State policy begin to depend on who exactly is trying to circumvent them and what kind of administrative or other support they enjoy.
Under the second scenario, the damage caused for the sake of "short-term gains" would not be limited to the country, national businesses, and Uzbek consumers. It would also undermine the very idea of investment predictability and the credibility of the course previously declared by the country's leadership toward the protection of intellectual property and support for right holders.
The original article published in the media is available at the following link: https://anhor.uz/pravovoy-razbor/parallel-import/
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
