Corbett v. Superior Court, 101 Cal. App. 4th 649 (2002)

The plaintiff in this non-employment case filed a class action seeking an injunction against a bank and a car dealership, alleging violations of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), fraud and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. This action arose from defendants’ alleged practice of approving car loans at an interest rate lower than that disclosed to the consumer and splitting the difference between the disclosed rate and the rate actually charged. The trial court struck that portion of the complaint that sought disgorgement of defendants’ profits into a fluid recovery fund and class certification to pursue the UCL claim. The Court of Appeal issued a peremptory writ of mandate directing the trial court to vacate its order refusing to consider a class action under the UCL, holding that class actions and UCL claims are not incompatible.