(1) (a) It is unlawful for any person, partnership, firm, corporation, joint stock company, or other association engaged in business within this state to sell, offer for sale, or advertise for sale any product or service for less than the cost of the product or service with the intent to both injure competitors and destroy competition and where the likely result of such sale would be the acquisition or maintenance of a monopoly. A vendor who violates this section commits a class 2 misdemeanor.
(b) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2007, p. 514, § 2, effective April 16, 2007.)
(2) For purposes of this section, "cost" means an appropriate determination of cost that is consistent with federal court interpretations of cost in federal predatory pricing cases under the federal "Sherman Act", 15 U.S.C. sec. 1 et seq.
(3) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2008, p. 2244, § 1, effective June 5, 2008.)
Source: L. 37: p. 1282, § 3. CSA: C. 48, § 302(3). L. 41: p. 821, § 3. L. 49: p. 343, § 3. CRS 53: § 55-2-3. C.R.S. 1963: § 55-2-3. L. 93: (1) amended, p. 1273, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2007: (1) and (2) amended, p. 514, § 2, effective April 16. L. 2008: Entire section amended, p. 2244, § 1, effective June 5. L. 2021: (1)(a) amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3134, § 58, effective March 1, 2022.
Notes of Decisions
Dunlap v. Colorado Springs Cablevision, Inc., 829 P.2d 1286 (Colo. 1992).
· cites it 6× “[8] Although the plaintiffs alleged a violation of both the sales below cost provision of the Unfair Practices Act, § 6-2-105, and the provision prohibiting area price discrimination, § 6-2-103, they alleged damages resulting only from price discrimination.”
Direct Sales Tire Co. v. Dist. Court in & for the Cnty. of Jefferson, 686 P.2d 1316 (Colo. 1984).
· cites it 5× “Royal Farm filed its complaint against Direct Sales seeking damages and injunctive relief arising from Direct Sales’ alleged violations of section 6-2-105, 2 C.R.S. (1973). 1 Royal Farm claims it sustained damages because Direct Sales offered, advertised, and sold gasoline at…”
Mastercar, Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co., 835 P.2d 534 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 23× “Plaintiff contends that defendants’ offer of a free car wash with the purchase of gasoline constitutes an illegal gift under the Colorado Unfair Practices Act, § 6-2-105, C.R.S., because defendants will receive no additional consideration for the wash.”
Par. Oil Co., Inc. v. Dillon Companies, Inc., 523 F.3d 1244 (10th Cir. 2008).
“Rather, “when consideration is paid for one product that is sold in conjunction with another product described to be ‘free’ or otherwise offered at no cost to the consumer, the transaction constitutes a combined sale, and thus, the product is not a gift pursuant to § 6-2-105,…”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 6-2-105(1): 2 cases
Dunlap v. Colorado Springs Cablevision, Inc., 829 P.2d 1286 (Colo. 1992).
“[8] Although the plaintiffs alleged a violation of both the sales below cost provision of the Unfair Practices Act, § 6-2-105, and the provision prohibiting area price discrimination, § 6-2-103, they alleged damages resulting only from price discrimination.”
Mastercar, Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co., 835 P.2d 534 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).
“Plaintiff contends that defendants’ offer of a free car wash with the purchase of gasoline constitutes an illegal gift under the Colorado Unfair Practices Act, § 6-2-105, C.R.S., because defendants will receive no additional consideration for the wash.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 6-2-105(2): 3 cases
Direct Sales Tire Co. v. Dist. Court in & for the Cnty. of Jefferson, 686 P.2d 1316 (Colo. 1984).
“Royal Farm filed its complaint against Direct Sales seeking damages and injunctive relief arising from Direct Sales’ alleged violations of section 6-2-105, 2 C.R.S. (1973). 1 Royal Farm claims it sustained damages because Direct Sales offered, advertised, and sold gasoline at…”
Mastercar, Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co., 835 P.2d 534 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).
“Plaintiff contends that defendants’ offer of a free car wash with the purchase of gasoline constitutes an illegal gift under the Colorado Unfair Practices Act, § 6-2-105, C.R.S., because defendants will receive no additional consideration for the wash.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 6-2-105(3): 1 case
Mastercar, Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co., 835 P.2d 534 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).
“Plaintiff contends that defendants’ offer of a free car wash with the purchase of gasoline constitutes an illegal gift under the Colorado Unfair Practices Act, § 6-2-105, C.R.S., because defendants will receive no additional consideration for the wash.”
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.