Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 30-64a (2026)

Sales within a wholesaler's geographic territory

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes or any regulations issued pursuant thereto to the contrary, a wholesaler, who sells any product or is authorized to sell any product by this chapter, shall sell such product to each retail permittee in the wholesaler's geographic territory who desires to purchase such product. Such wholesaler shall not charge any retail permittee, to whom the wholesaler is required to sell by virtue of this section, a different rate for the delivery or transportation of any alcoholic liquor than such wholesaler would charge any other retail permittee. Where distance, road conditions, travel time or any such factor substantially affects the cost of delivery or transportation of a product sold by a wholesaler, the wholesaler shall file a schedule of proposed delivery charges with the Department of Consumer Protection. Such schedule shall only apply after a hearing by and upon written approval from said department.

(P.A. 78-93, S. 1, 2; P.A. 80-482, S. 4, 170, 191, 197, 345, 348; P.A. 95-195, S. 68, 83; June 30 Sp. Sess. P.A. 03-6, S. 146(d); P.A. 04-169, S. 17; 04-189, S. 1.)

History: P.A. 80-482 made division of liquor control an independent department and abolished the department of business regulation, overriding provision of same act which would have placed the division within the public safety department; P.A. 95-195 substituted Department of Consumer Protection for Department of Liquor Control, effective July 1, 1995; June 30 Sp. Sess. P.A. 03-6 and P.A. 04-169 replaced Department of Consumer Protection with Department of Agriculture and Consumer Protection, effective July 1, 2004; P.A. 04-189 repealed Sec. 146 of June 30 Sp. Sess. P.A. 03-6, thereby reversing the merger of the Departments of Agriculture and Consumer Protection, effective June 1, 2004.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2005–2022 · leading case: Eder Bros. v. Wine Merchants of Connecticut, Inc., 880 A.2d 138 (Conn. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Eder Bros. v. Wine Merchants of Connecticut, Inc., 880 A.2d 138 (Conn. 2005). · cites it 6× “* 2 Additionally, the plaintiffs alleged that, because the defendant offered the “jumbo case” to only a select group of retailers, it violated General Statutes § 30-64a. 3 Finally, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant’s eon- *367 duct amounted to unfair trade practices in…”

NEMS, PLLC v. Harvard Pilgrim Health Care of Connecticut, Inc. (D. Conn. 2022). “§§ 30-64a and 30-94a, created an implied private right of action.”

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.