BREAKING NEWS
NZ Rugby and Blues start proceedings against Rene Ranger over drink-driving ... Read more
Close

Danone court case against Fonterra delayed

NIKO KLOETEN
Last updated 11:00 18/07/2014

Relevant offers

Dairy

Farmers struggle to lift confidence as outside markets and politics weigh heavily Brothers-in-arms at the sheep breeding frontline Sharemilkers Ian and Natalie Butler work with farm owners Ken and Christine Sole to manage low milk price Massey University seeks participants for agrichemical study Pasture is growing at Westpac Taranaki Agricultural Research Station Government signs off on new rules to safeguard bobby calves Fonterra, ECan join forces to tackle Kaikoura water quality Lyn Webster questions the ramifications for New Zealand of the changing international market Dairy farmers prepare for the busiest time of the year Adopting orangutans leads Kiwi woman to helping Borneo's orphaned elephants

French food giant Danone's High Court case against Fonterra has been put on hold so the companies can go to arbitration.

Danone, which owns infant formula business Nutricia, launched the legal action against Fonterra after cancelling its supply contract with the dairy co-operative this year.

The companies fell out over last year's botulism scare, which Danone says cost it €350 million (NZ$545m).

The French firm alleges Fonterra breached the Fair Trading Act by making false claims in the early stages of the saga, which led to a mass recall of whey protein powder used for infant formula.

Nutricia had to recall 67,000 cans of its Karicare infant formula brand.

Danone is taking a separate case against Fonterra to arbitration in Singapore. Fonterra argued the case in the High Court in Auckland should wait until the outcome of that arbitration was decided.

During the High Court hearing, Fonterra's lawyer, Alan Galbraith, QC, said Danone's case was being done the wrong way and targeting the wrong company.

But Danone's lawyer, David Goddard, QC, said the delay would be unfair and the arbitration could take more than a year to complete.

Justice Geoffrey Venning ruled the two cases were sufficiently connected that it would be "unrealistic" to deal with them separately without reference to each other.

"In my view the arbitration should go first because the parties agreed the arbitration process was to apply to claims arising out of the supply of product by Fonterra to Danone," the judge said in his judgment.

"The central dispute in this matter lies between Fonterra and Danone."

However, he left the door open for Danone to remove the stay if Fonterra delayed the arbitration.

Ad Feedback

- Stuff

Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content