TL;DR: Marnco, an Australian fertiliser company, enters the New Zealand market, sparking legal action from FANZ over product quality claims. The dispute focuses on whether Marnco’s superphosphate meets the 8% Fertmark standard, with a court hearing set for September.
A significant battle has ignited between Australian company Marnco and New Zealand’s farmer co-operative companies over the fertiliser market. This follows Marnco’s entry into the New Zealand market, promising competitive prices on superphosphate, which has led to legal tensions.
Marnco’s Market Entry
Just one month ago, Marnco began operations in New Zealand, catching the eye of local farmers with attractively priced superphosphate. Their first large shipment, totalling 30,000 tonnes, arrived from Vietnam, distributed in Timaru and Tauranga. This move has stirred considerable interest among the farming community.
Legal Challenges Arise
However, the Fertiliser Association of New Zealand (FANZ), led by major players Ravensdown and Ballance, did not welcome this new competition warmly. They have launched a legal challenge against Marco, questioning the quality of its superphosphate. FANZ alleges that Marnco’s product, containing about 7.4% phosphate, falls short of the Fertmark standard, which is set at 8%.
Court Injunction Filed
FANZ’s action has led to a request for a court injunction to prevent Marnco from selling their superphosphate under its current representation. The court will hear the case in September, providing time for all parties to prepare.
Industry Responses
Kelvin Wickham, CEO of Ballance, expressed that while competition is acceptable, misleading claims are not. He stated the industry’s willingness to compete, as long as the products are represented accurately according to Fertmark standards.
Marnco Defends Its Product
In response to these accusations, Mark Been, Marnco’s managing director, defended the quality of their fertiliser. He described their product as high-quality, with low cadmium levels, good granulation, and minimal dust. Marnco has also initiated independent testing to verify the quality and composition of their fertiliser, questioning the methodology of previous tests conducted by FANZ and Ballance.
Broader Industry Implications
This confrontation highlights the ongoing ambiguities in New Zealand’s fertiliser standards and the non-mandatory nature of Fertmark accreditation. The case recalls a similar legal battle from four years ago involving industry veteran Dr Bert Quin. His dispute with Ballance also revolved around product definitions and labelling under the Fertmark code.
Dr Quin’s Commentary
Dr Quin noted similarities between his past legal battle and the current situation with Marnco. He suggested that even if a product does not meet every standard, its benefits should not be dismissed if it effectively delivers nutrients over time.
As Marnco prepares to defend its market position, supported by major American fertiliser supplier Nitron, the industry watches closely. This case not only affects the two companies involved but could also set precedents for product standards and marketing within the agricultural sector in New Zealand.
