A Merkle chain[0] append-only ledger contains a transaction minting the certificate, and the consistency rules for that Merkle chain mean that any extension of the chain which mints another such certificate is not valid (the same as a extension that spends money from a account with no money in it is not valid).
0: technically a blockchain specifically, but that's not actually relevant
The enforcement, interestingly, is more traditional; the owners of the "Valuables by CENT" trademark can use existing legal structures to prevent anyone else using that name.
Meanwhile the NFT is digitally linked to the Valuables by CENT smart contract on Ethereum, which will presumably have an 'author' property attached to it, set to the string "Valuables by CENT".
Ah, so they pinkie swear not to do it a second time?
Your average blockchain was founded recently, and have a lot less to lose taking the money and running, or popping up again under a new name, for a second go at the same shtick.
How many "brand of certificates" are there now, and what is the barrier to entry?
I suspect 1) several and 2) low.
Also, how is "there will never be another certificate for the same thing, from the same brand of certificates" technically enforced?