Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 526.305 (2025)
Discriminatory practices unlawful; exceptions.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
526.305 Discriminatory practices unlawful; exceptions.—
(1) It is unlawful for any person engaged in commerce in this state:
(a) To sell for resale any grade of motor fuel at a price lower than the price at which the seller contemporaneously sells motor fuel of like grade and quality to another person on the same level of distribution, in the same class of trade, and within the same relevant geographic market as the purchaser; or
(b) To knowingly receive for resale any grade of motor fuel at a price lower than the price at which the seller from which the motor fuel is purchased or received contemporaneously sells motor fuel of like grade and quality to another person on the same level of distribution, in the same class of trade, and within the same relevant geographic market as the purchaser;
where the effect is to injure competition.
(2) A sale of motor fuel of like grade and quality at different prices to persons at the same level of distribution is not a violation of this section if the difference in price is due to a difference in the cost of sale or delivery resulting from differing methods or quantities in which the grade of motor fuel is sold or delivered.
(3) Subject to the limitations of s. 526.304(3), a sale made in good faith to meet an equally low price of a competitor selling motor fuel of like grade which can be used in the same motor vehicle is not a violation of this section.
(4) It is unlawful for a refiner to sell any grade of motor fuel to a wholesaler under written contract at a price, after adding federal, state, and local taxes and inspection fees, which is higher than the net price, after deducting all allowances, rebates, and discounts, at which the refiner contemporaneously sells motor fuel of like grade and quality to a dealer in competition with any retail outlet supplied by such wholesaler, where the effect is to injure competition; except to the extent that the difference in price is attributable to a rebate, rent subsidy, or other concession which is offered to the wholesaler on proportionately equal or comparable terms.
(5) An isolated, inadvertent incident involving the activity prohibited pursuant to subsection (1) or subsection (4) shall not be a violation of this act.
Arrestable Offenses under F.S. 526.305
M = misdemeanor · F = felony · degree: F=1st S=2nd T=3rd§526.305(1)FRAUDDISCRIM PRICE MOTOR FUEL FOR RESALE SUBSQ OFF
§526.305(1)FRAUDDISCRIM PRICE OF MOTOR FUEL FOR RESALE 1ST OFF
§526.305(4)FRAUDREFINER PRICE DISCRIM DLR WHOLESALER SUBSQ OFF
§526.305(4)FRAUDREFINER PRICE DISCRIM W DLR WHOLESALER 1ST OFF
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1991–2015 · leading case: United Food Mart, Inc. v. Motiva Enter., LLC, 457 F. Supp. 2d 1329 (S.D. Fla. 2005).
United Food Mart, Inc. v. Motiva Enter., LLC, 457 F. Supp. 2d 1329 (S.D. Fla. 2005). “” Fla. Stat. § 526.305 (1)(a). Plaintiffs have offered the testimony of Dr.”
Phillips Petroleum Co. v. State ex rel. Butterworth, 584 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). “Therefore, we conclude that the trial court’s finding that appellant’s retail pricing at the time and places in question is illegal under section 526.305, Florida Statutes (1989), was error and the temporary injunction order under review is reversed.”
NJN Sys., Inc. v. Sunoco, Inc., 95 F. Supp. 3d 1330 (M.D. Fla. 2015). “” See § 526.305(3, 5) Fla. Stat. Defendant argues that its undisputed pricing information demonstrates that, for the entire duration of the alleged violations, the stores were almost always meeting competition within the relevant geographic market, the greater Daytona Beach…”
United Food Mart, Inc. v. Motiva Enter., LLC, 404 F. Supp. 2d 1344 (S.D. Fla. 2005). “” Fla. Stat. § 526.305 (l)(a). 3 . Dr. Marmorstein also opines that Motiva exhibited bad faith toward Lakes Shell, and he makes an estimate of Lakes Shell's lost profits due to Motiva’s alleged illegal conduct.”
— 526.305(3) — 1 case
NJN Sys., Inc. v. Sunoco, Inc., 95 F. Supp. 3d 1330 (M.D. Fla. 2015). “” See § 526.305(3, 5) Fla. Stat. Defendant argues that its undisputed pricing information demonstrates that, for the entire duration of the alleged violations, the stores were almost always meeting competition within the relevant geographic market, the greater Daytona Beach…”
— 526.305(4) — 1 case
Phillips Petroleum Co. v. State ex rel. Butterworth, 584 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). “Therefore, we conclude that the trial court’s finding that appellant’s retail pricing at the time and places in question is illegal under section 526.305, Florida Statutes (1989), was error and the temporary injunction order under review is reversed.”
— 526.305(l)(a) — 1 case
United Food Mart, Inc. v. Motiva Enter., LLC, 457 F. Supp. 2d 1329 (S.D. Fla. 2005). “” Fla. Stat. § 526.305 (1)(a). Plaintiffs have offered the testimony of Dr.”
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.