Overview
In California, plaintiffs' lawyers and state and local prosecutors wield two powerful tools: the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). The UCL forbids "unlawful, unfair or fraudulent" conduct in connection with virtually any type of business activity. With its sweeping liability standards and broad equitable remedies, the UCL is often the weapon of choice for plaintiffs' lawyers and is almost uniformly invoked by prosecutors in consumer cases. The CLRA is more defined in structure, but no less potent. The CLRA applies to any "consumer" transaction involving the "sale or lease of goods or services" and authorizes recovery of actual, statutory and punitive damages. While the UCL broadly prohibits any "unfair" practice, CLRA liability depends upon proof of a violation of one of its expressly stated prohibitions, organized into thirty main categories. The CLRA also provides for streamlined class certification proceedings and restrictions on dispositive motion practice.
The UCL and CLRA remain among the most powerful tools for consumer litigation and government enforcement. Recent years have seen expanded class actions and enforcement activity targeting product labeling, reference pricing, subscription renewals, data privacy, real estate practices, and fee disclosures. Courts are allowing increasingly technical theories—particularly around ingredient claims, pricing practices, and disclosures—to proceed, while prosecutors continue to secure significant penalties and injunctive relief. At the same time, key judicial decisions are reshaping standing, statute‑of‑limitations defenses, and the enforceability of choice‑of‑law provisions, with major rulings pending that could further expand exposure for businesses operating in or touching California markets. Consumer‑facing companies should expect heightened scrutiny and evolving risk under the UCL and CLRA in 2026 and beyond.
