“Advantages: Suits under Bus. & Prof.C. § 17200 offer plaintiffs and public law enforcement officials these advantages: Subject to certain limitations, section 17200’s prohibition of “unlawful” business acts and practices allows redress for statutory violations even if a private cause of action is not otherwise provided. Public prosecutors may use § 17200 to attack business practices they could not otherwise reach because enforcement is committed to other agencies. Subject to important limitations, section 17200’s prohibition of “unfair” and “deceptive” acts allows plaintiffs to attack business practices that are not expressly proscribed by any established law. By virtue of a 1992 amendment, these claims reach conduct that has been discontinued and even one-time acts. In the antitrust area, § 17200 may be used to attack practices that might be otherwise unassailable under traditional antitrust doctrine. Businesses suing competitors for trade or product infringement-type claims will find that bringing a § 17200 cause of action has advantages over certain Lanham Act or other classic unfair competition claims. Much of the law is still unsettled, so suits under § 17200 allow wide latitude to creative lawyering. Disadvantages: On the other hand, § 17200 suits have these disadvantages: Private plaintiffs cannot recover compensatory or punitive damages on a § 17200 or § 17500 claim. There is no right to a jury in a § 17200 case. There is no automatic right to attorney fees. Judges are sometimes wary of § 17200 claims and may be reluctant to allow some of the more expansive theories.”
[Business & Professions Code Section 17200 Practice [certain citations omitted]]
