That mediation is set down for Thursday this week, but if that fails a one month-long trial has been scheduled to start on November 15.
Lawyer for the farmers David Burstyner was contacted for comment.
What matters most to you? Have your say ahead of the state election.
His firm Adley Burstyner previously said on its website the action sought financial compensation for dairy farmers who supplied New Zealand dairy giant Fonterra in May and June 2016.
The case was filed in the Supreme Court of Victoria on June 17, 2020.
The firm said court hearings have taken place throughout 2020, last year and now this year.
“Orders that Fonterra discover documents were made on April 21, 2021. Mediation with Fonterra has been set for October 13 and trial has been set to commence November 15,” the website said.
As well as producing 55,000 documents as ordered by the court, including New Zealand board minutes and internal pricing communications, Fonterra has filed detailed witness statements of Matthew Watt, Judith Swales, Michael Cronin and Mark Conway.
“The plaintiffs have filed their witness statements, and five expert reports – from a world-class milk price expert, a forensic accountant, an expert industry consultant and and industry expert and leader and a psychologist.”
In late June this year it was reported in The Standard that farmers feared Fonterra was attempting to weaken compensation claims to Australian suppliers affected by the milk processor’s 2016 price clawback, with a new defence.
In a hearing on June 15, Fonterra sought an order allowing it to change its defence to include a 40 cent payment made to farmers in 2017-18, claiming it should be treated as part of the controversial 2016 farmgate price clawback.
The class action alleges Fonterra breached its contractual obligations with a retrospective step down in May 2016 by slashing the milk payments expected.
Farmers were forced to pay back a sizeable portion of their income, in a year the NZ giant went on to post an $834 million profit.
The clawback caused a severe cash-flow crisis and triggered a class action that is supported by 300 farmers who allege Fonterra engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct, acted unconscionably and breached contracts it had with dairy farmers.
Former suppliers called the defence “absolute rubbish” and an attempt to reduce the financial compensation claim for retrospective lost income, which is expected to be “hundreds of millions of dollars” according to Mr Burstyner
He said the 40c payment was not paid to all farmers who suffered the step down as Fonterra refused to give it to suppliers who had switched to other processors.
“It seemed very spiteful conduct,” Mr Burstyner said.
At the time, Fonterra Australia farm source director Matthew Watt “this payment relates to the 17-18 season, not the 15-16 season”.
Mr Watt wrote on dairy insider blog, “although not legally obliged, we are making the additional 40c payment to our suppliers as it’s the right thing to do”.
All Fonterra farmers affected by the 2015-16 price drop are being offered the opportunity to receive this additional payment, including existing, retired and returning farmers,” he wrote.
“We’re in the process of contacting all the farmers that have left us.”
The payment coincided with a move by besieged Murray Goulburn to write off almost $150 million in debts owed by farmers after the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission launched legal action against the cooperative over the 2015-16 milk price fiasco.
Twelve months ago Fonterra managing director René Dedoncker said the future of dairy in the south-west was safe, adding the Cobden factory was here to stay “for the long run”.
The comments came about three years after Fonterra closed its Dennington site, forcing 100 workers out of a job.
Last month Fonterra announced it was abandoning plans to sell its Australian operations.
Fonterra was contacted for comment.
Legal notice about Intellectual Property in digital contents. All information contained in these pages that is NOT owned by eDairy News and is NOT considered “public domain” by legal regulations, are registered trademarks of their respective owners and recognized by our company as such. The publication on the eDairy News website is made for the purpose of gathering information, respecting the rules contained in the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works; in Law 11.723 and other applicable rules. Any claim arising from the information contained in the eDairy News website shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Ordinary Courts of the First Judicial District of the Province of Córdoba, Argentina, with seat in the City of Córdoba, excluding any other jurisdiction, including the Federal.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
eDairy News Spanish
eDairy News PORTUGUESE