131
CHAPTER 11
FLORIDA
A. Scope of the Statute and Elements of a Cause of Action
The Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices A ct (FDUTPA)1 is
intended to “protect the consuming public and legitimate business
enterprises from those who engage in unfair methods of competition, or
unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct of any
trade or commerce.”2 The act simply states that “[u]nfair methods of
competition, unconscionable acts or practices, and unfair or deceptive acts
or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared
unlawful.”3 When construing that particular provision, due consideration
and great weight are given to interpretations by the Federal Trade
Commission and the federal courts of section 5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade
Commission Act.4
Deception occurs if there is “a representation, omission, or practice
that is likely to mislead the consumer acting reasonably in the
circumstances, to the consumer’s detriment.”5 To establish deception
under the act, a plaintiff need not prove actual reliance but instead he or
she must prove that an objectively reasonable person would have been
deceived in the same circumstances.6 The act does not define an unfair act
or practice. The Florida Supreme Court applied the FTC’s policy stat emen t
from 1964 in a 2003 opinion,7 whereas a Florida District Court of Appeals
later applied the definition contained in the FTC’s 1980 policy statement.8
1. FLA. STAT. §§ 501.201 through 501.213.
2. Id. § 501.202(2).
3. Id. § 501.204(1).
4. Id. § 501.204(2).
(citations omitted).
App. 2004); Carriuolo v. Gen. Motors Co., 823 F.3d 977, 983-84 (11th Cir.
2016).
7. PNR, Inc. v. Beacon Prop. Mgmt., 842 So. 2d 773, 777 (Fla. 2003) (“An
unfair practice is “one that ‘offends established public policy’ and one that
is ‘immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous or substantially injurious
to consumers.’”).
App. 2014) (adopting the 1980 FTC Po licy Statement standard of
