MDPPACPB Regulations

Page 23 of 127
23 
 
 
(b) 
Adherence to fuel quality control standards; 
 
(c) 
Safety and operational protocols consistent with regulatory and 
brand requirements. 
(3) Prohibition of Anticompetitive Franchise Restrictions 
No franchise agreement shall: 
 
(a) 
Require a franchisee or branded dealer to source non-fuel 
products (e.g., lubricants, beverages, convenience store inventory) solely from 
the brand owner or an affiliated supplier, unless there is clear operational or 
quality justification; 
 
(b) 
Impose exclusivity or sourcing restrictions on non-core petroleum-
related goods or services (for example, car wash supplies, retail snacks, 
telecom services, etc.) in a manner that limits competition in those markets; 
 
(c) 
Extend exclusivity beyond fuel supply and essential brand 
standards without clear pro-competitive efficiencies. 
(4) Competition Review and Invalidity of Restrictive Clauses 
All franchise agreements shall be subject to review by the Authority upon 
request by the dealer or during periodic audits. The Authority may: 
 
(a) 
Require submission of standard franchise and supply agreements 
for compliance screening; 
 
(b) 
Declare void and unenforceable any clause or condition found 
to: 
(i) 
Substantially lessen competition in any ancillary market 
(such as  bottled water, food & beverages, lubricants, fintech 
services); 
 
 
(ii) 
Foreclose competitors from accessing distribution outlets; 
 
(iii) 
Impose unjustified exclusive dealing beyond what is 
necessary to protect brand integrity. 
(5) 
Justification of Ancillary Exclusivity 
Where a brand owner seeks to justify exclusive or preferential arrangements for 
non-fuel goods or services, it must demonstrate: 
 
(a) 
Verifiable quality or safety rationale, or; 
 
(b) 
Substantial efficiency benefits that outweigh the restrictive effect 
on competition; 
 
(c) 
That alternative suppliers are not unduly foreclosed, and that 
dealers retain some flexibility in non-core business sourcing. 
(6) Dealer Protections 
Dealers who believe they are being subjected to unlawful exclusivity or tying 
within their franchise relationship may: 
 
(a) 
Lodge a complaint with the Authority; 
 
(b) 
Seek interim relief or exemption from specific contractual 
obligations; 
 
(c) 
Request a formal ruling on the legality of a clause under this 
Regulation.