By Fresh Fruit Portal editor Matthew Ogg

Once again New Zealand's Zespri is involved in a legal battle, and as seems to often be the case with the kiwifruit exporter, it is very difficult for the outside observer to determine whether the whole matter will be of great importance or just irrelevant.

The latter is certainly the angle that Zespri is going out to the public with, along with leaders from the country's kiwifruit industry. That's understandable; downplay the issue, no need to get growers worked up over something that will be of little consequence.

The single desk marketer's response to the issue has been baffling however, not with regards to whether the claims are valid or not, but in that it's on a completely different timeframe to what has been mentioned by those involved with the plaintiffs.

"The allegations in this claim relate to matters that happened last decade. They were rejected by the Chinese courts and we expect the New Zealand courts will do the same," a spokesperson said, adding that the claim had been formally served to Zespri late Wednesday afternoon.

Last decade? Without having seen the actual claims filed in the Auckland High Court, I am in no position to say there aren't any matters in the case relating to events prior to 2010, but indications from Jhun Si - the nephew of imprisoned former import partner Liu Xiongjie - seem to show the core concerns relate to the years 2011 and 2012.

"The claims are the original under-declared tax, and the fine that comes along with it, and the compensation for premature termination of the business arrangement," Si told me yesterday.

He added investments had allegedly been made in storage and cooling facilities in conjunction with the Zespri partnership, along with the hiring of employees, but that had "all gone to waste".

For readers who are unfamiliar with Zespri's problems in China, subsidiary Zespri Management Consulting Corporation (ZMCC) was found guilty as an accessory to the crime of smuggling with a fine of NZ$960,000 (US$760,000). The ruling was made in 2013, around a year after Liu pleaded guilty to criminal smuggling.

When the issue first came to light with a story from Chinese media organization CCTV in 2011, Zespri denied 30,000 metric tons (MT) of its kiwifruit had been seized by customs officials in China. Si claims otherwise, and has alleged only 20% of the fruit in that seizure could be sold.

But that's the nature of dispute isn't it? One word against another. In the view of New Zealand Kiwifruit Growers Inc (NZKGI) president Neil Trebilco, the newly filed case is simply a matter of "an aggrieved ex-partner who has been caught doing what they shouldn’t be doing".

"In fact they’ve pleaded guilty in the courts for not paying duty, but now they're trying to re-litigate in the New Zealand court. I don't think they’ll have any more success in the New Zealand court," he said.

"But perhaps there are some gains to be made through putting a claim against Zespri and perhaps making claims in the media."

Trebilco might be right, but it's the "last decade" response that I'm still trying to get my head around. Cryptic statements are not all that uncommon in the fruit industry - think Chiquita's exit from its "deciduous" business in 2012 - but this one goes the extra mile in pushing Zespri's China problems into the historical archives.

It probably is correct that Zespri feels a key element in the case relates to something that happened last decade, but the response does little to alleviate concerns over a company that has had its fair share of scandals in recent years and is currently under investigation by New Zealand's Serious Fraud Office.

It reminds me of when we were putting together a story on a Korean Fair Trade Commission investigation into Zespri's actions back in 2011. The company ended up being fined US$375,000 for monopolistic practices, but in its responses to our questions prior to that the company highlighted 2,000 such inquiries were investigated every year in South Korea.

"As part of this we informed growers of the potential remedies if Zespri were found to be in breach in any way – one of the remedies is a penalty which we estimate could be as high as $US160,000," a spokesperson said at the time, forecasting a maximum amount that was less than half of the end amount.

This sum is a trifle compared to the NZ$33.5 million the plaintiffs are claiming in the current case. And while any investor - kiwifruit or otherwise - must take stock of the likelihood of any outcome, even if the Chinese companies had a 1% chance of success that would equate to a weighted average of NZ$335,000 to be forked out.

According to Simon Limmer, Zespri's general manager for China, the company's problems in China are a thing of the past.

"We believe that the Zespri brand, through the problems of the past, has remained very strong and we don't see any issues with our reputation in China. There’s still a very strong perception of Zespri in China," he said.

For the sake of New Zealand's kiwifruit growers, I sure hope he's right.

www.freshfruitportal.com