Predictably, the UCL "safe harbor" can be supplied by regulations

The Second Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal has been busy issuing decisions in the last few weeks that touch on matters relevant to class actions and complex litigation.  Any decision concerning the Unfair Competition Law ("UCL") certainly qualifies.  On August 18, 2008, the Court of Appeal, in Yabsley v. Cingular Wireless, LLC (Second Appellate District, Division Six) held that the "safe harbor" discussed in Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co., 20 Cal.4th 163 (1999) could be supplied by a regulation, not just a statute.  This doesn't qualify as a grounbreaking holding.  The Cel-Tech analysis essentially says that when conduct is expressly declared lawful under a statutory scheme, it cannot constitute a violation of the UCL.  As the Yabsley Court noted, regulations, when properly promulgated, have the same force and effect as statutes.