Cal. Codes » Business and Professions Code / DIVISION 7. GENERAL BUSINESS REGULATIONS / PART 2. PRESERVATION AND REGULATION OF COMPETITION / CHAPTER 5. Enforcement
California Codes

Cal. Business and Professions Code § 17200 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

As used in this chapter, unfair competition shall mean and include any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising and any act prohibited by Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17500) of Part 3 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,782 cases (678 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 63 P.3d 937 (Cal. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 63 P.3d 937 (Cal. 2003). · cites it 4× “2d 718 , from which I dissented, I further agree that nonrestitutionary disgorgement of profits is not an available remedy in an individual action under the unfair competition law, *57 Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq.”
Penpower Tech. Ltd. v. S.P.C. Tech., 627 F. Supp. 2d 1083 (N.D. Cal. 2008). · cites it 7× “§ 1116 ; (4) unfair competition, deceptive advertising and unfair trade practices under California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq.”
Yelp Inc. v. Catron, 70 F. Supp. 3d 1082 (N.D. Cal. 2014). · cites it 5× “§ 1125 (d), unfair competition under California Business and Professions Code § 17200, false advertising under California Business and Professions Code § 17500, breach of contract, and intentional interference with contractual relations.”
Bradley Van Patten v. Vertical Fitness Grp., 847 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “§ 227 ; (2) violation of California Business and Professions Code § 17538.”
Leonard Cottrell v. Alcon Labs., 874 F.3d 154 (3rd Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “; the California Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Cal. Bus. Prof. Code § 17200 , et seq.; the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (“FDUTPA”), Fla.”
Neilson v. Union Bank of California, N.A., 290 F. Supp. 2d 1101 (C.D. Cal. 2003). · cites it 3× “The Alleged Ponzi Scheme Plaintiffs filed this action in federal court on September 5, 2002, alleging claims for aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, constructive fraud,…”
Lueras v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, 221 Cal. App. 4th 49 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 3× “Unfair and Unlawful Practices In the fifth cause of action of the First Amended Complaint, Lueras alleged Bank of America engaged in “deceptive business practices” in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq.”
McDonald v. Coldwell Banker, 543 F.3d 498 (9th Cir. 2008). · cites it 5× “Coleman, as McDonald's real estate agent, sued the listing agents under California Business and Professions Code § 17200, for the commission she lost as a result of the lost sale of the property.”
Prachasaisoradej v. Ralphs Grocery Co., 165 P.3d 133 (Cal. 2007). · cites it 5× “employed ], In other words, [the employees] are forced to carry the burden of losses from their respective stores in violation of Labor Code sections 221, 400 through 410, and 3751, Business and Professions Code section 17200, and Regulation 11070.”
Kim v. Westmoore Partners, Inc., 201 Cal. App. 4th 267 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 3× “” However, Business and Professions Code section 17200 does not actually prohibit any conduct.”
Vasserman v. Henry Mayo Newhall Mem'l Hosp., 65 F. Supp. 3d 932 (C.D. Cal. 2014). · cites it 4× “Vasserman’s Claims On behalf of these classes, Vasserman pleads claims for (1) violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq.”
SWAB Fin. v. E Trade Sec., 2007 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5451 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “As to prejudice, plaintiff asserted: "[I]t seems to be obvious that you potentially have a res judicata or collateral estoppel effect on the [Business and Professions Code section 17200] claim that goes forward, you have the potential for multiple and inconsistent rulings, and…”
Show all 1,782 citing cases →
— Cal. Business and Professions Code § 17200(UCL) — 1 case
Dilts v. Penske Logistics LLC, 819 F. Supp. 2d 1109 (S.D. Cal. 2011).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.