In order to promote the uniform administration of the Unfair Practices Act in New Mexico, the attorney general is to be responsible for its enforcement, but he may in appropriate cases delegate this authority to the district attorneys of the state and when this is done, the district attorneys shall have every power conferred upon the attorney general by the Unfair Practices Act.

History: 1953 Comp., § 49-15-13, enacted by Laws 1967, ch. 268, § 12.

An arbitration agreement contrary to public policy under the UPA will not be enforced. — Where the state of New Mexico filed suit against ITT Technical Institute (ITT) claiming violations of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act (UPA) arising out of alleged misrepresentations to students about ITT's nursing program and its financial process, and where ITT filed a motion to compel arbitration in accordance with the arbitration provision, and accompanying confidentiality clause, in the students' enrollment agreements with ITT, which provided that any dispute be resolved by binding arbitration, the district court properly declined to enforce the confidentiality clause and properly denied ITT's motion to compel arbitration, because the state, under the UPA, has been given broad statutory authority to investigate violations and enforce the provisions of the UPA demonstrating New Mexico's fundamental public policy in favor of preventing consumer harm and resolving consumer claims, and it would be contrary to public policy to allow ITT to use the confidentiality clause with its students to shield itself from the state's investigation and litigation authorized under the UPA. State ex rel. Balderas v. ITT Educ. Servs., Inc., 2018-NMCA-044.