Utah Code » Title 54, Chapter 3 — Duties of Public Utilities
Utah Code

Utah Code § 54-3-8 (2026)

Preferences forbidden -- Power of commission to determine facts -- Applicability of section

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Except as provided in Chapter 8b, Public Telecommunications Law, a public utility may not:
as to rates, charges, service, facilities or in any other respect, make or grant any preference or advantage to any person, or subject any person to any prejudice or disadvantage; and
establish or maintain any unreasonable difference as to rates, charges, service or facilities, or in any other respect, either as between localities or as between classes of service.
The commission shall have power to determine any question of fact arising under this section.
This section does not apply to, and the commission may not enforce this chapter concerning, a schedule, classification, rate, price, charge, fare, toll, rental, rule, service, facility, or contract of an entity described in Subsection 54-2-1(9)(b)(iii) or (iv), (21), or (23)(h), or if the electricity is consumed by an eligible customer for the eligible customer's own use or the use of the eligible customer's tenant or affiliate.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1955–2023 · leading case: Mountain States Legal Found. v. Utah Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 636 P.2d 1047 (Utah 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mountain States Legal Found. v. Utah Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 636 P.2d 1047 (Utah 1981). · cites it 14× “Mountain States Legal Foundation ("MSLF") challenges the "senior citizen" rate on the ground that it is an unlawful preference under § 54-3-8 Utah Code Ann. (1953), as amended; not supported by adequate findings; and a denial of equal protection of the laws.”
Bradshaw v. Wilkinson Water Co., 2004 UT 38 (Utah 2004). · cites it 6× “¶ 14 Utah law prohibits public utilities from engaging in disparate treatment of sim *246 ilarly situated customers, Utah Code Ann. § 54-3-8 (2003), 2 and requires that a utility’s charges be “just and reasonable,” id.”
Hi-Country Estates Homeowners Ass'n v. Bagley & Co., 863 P.2d 1 (Utah Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “The PSC determined, in an order dated March 17, 1986, that the well lease agreement was “grossly unreasonable” and that it had the effect of “showering virtually limitless benefits on Jesse Dansie and the members of his immediate family.”
Hi-Country Estates Homeowners Ass'n v. Bagley & Co., 2008 UT App 105 (Utah Ct. App. 2008). “§ 54-3-8(1) (Supp.2007). The Association further relies on the 1986 PSC order, arguing that the order determined the Well Lease to be " 'grossly unreasonable.”
Vote Solar v. Pub. Serv. Commn., 2023 UT 13 (Utah 2023). · cites it 2× “14 ¶81 On the first sub-issue, the PSC does not contest the legal premise that it cannot treat similarly situated customers differently but contends that Customer Generators are not similarly situated to other ratepayers.”
Am. Salt Co. v. W.S. Hatch Co., 748 P.2d 1060 (Utah 1987). · cites it 2× “American Salt relies upon Utah Code Ann. §§ 54-3-8 (preferences and discriminatory practices prohibited), 54-3-6(2), and 54-3-7 (1986) (common carriers must extend uniform contracts to shippers).”
Ellis-Hall Consultants, LLC v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 2014 UT 52 (Utah 2014). “§ 54-3-8(1)(a) (prohibiting public utilities from "mak{[ing] or grant[ing] any preference or advantage to any person'" with regard to any "rates, charges, service, facilities or in any other respect).”
Ellis-Hall v. PSC, 2014 UT 52 (Utah 2014). “§ 54-3-8(1)(a) (prohibiting public utilities from “mak[ing] or grant[ing] any preference or advantage to any per- son” with regard to any “rates, charges, service, facilities or in any other respect”).”
Cedar City Corp. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 290 P.2d 454 (Utah 1955). · cites it 2× “Section 54-3-8, U.C.A.1953. . Section 54-7-16, U.”
— Utah Code § 54-3-8(1) — 1 case
Hi-Country Estates Homeowners Ass'n v. Bagley & Co., 2008 UT App 105 (Utah Ct. App. 2008). “§ 54-3-8(1) (Supp.2007). The Association further relies on the 1986 PSC order, arguing that the order determined the Well Lease to be " 'grossly unreasonable.”
— Utah Code § 54-3-8(1)(a) — 2 cases
Ellis-Hall Consultants, LLC v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 2014 UT 52 (Utah 2014). “§ 54-3-8(1)(a) (prohibiting public utilities from "mak{[ing] or grant[ing] any preference or advantage to any person'" with regard to any "rates, charges, service, facilities or in any other respect).”
Ellis-Hall v. PSC, 2014 UT 52 (Utah 2014). “§ 54-3-8(1)(a) (prohibiting public utilities from “mak[ing] or grant[ing] any preference or advantage to any per- son” with regard to any “rates, charges, service, facilities or in any other respect”).”
— Utah Code § 54-3-8(1)(b) — 1 case
Vote Solar v. Pub. Serv. Commn., 2023 UT 13 (Utah 2023). “14 ¶81 On the first sub-issue, the PSC does not contest the legal premise that it cannot treat similarly situated customers differently but contends that Customer Generators are not similarly situated to other ratepayers.”
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.