# Kiwifruit case setting a precedent?

- Link: https://rd2.co.nz/kiwifruit-case-setting-a-precedent/
- Published: 2018-07-17T03:18:32+00:00
- Author: Molly Callaghan

The kiwifruit claim decision in favour of growers has wide implications for biosecurity,
says Dr Nic Lees, a senior lecturer in agribusiness at Lincoln University.

The decision is that MPI (Ministry for Primary Industries) had a “duty to exercise
reasonable skill and care when undertaking their responsibilities in relation to
bio-security”, but that it had failed to exercise this skill and care, allowing 
the PSA disease into New Zealand in 2010, Lees said.
 “This means MPI can be liable
for its decisions on the importation of any product that may have biosecurity risks,”
he says. “In the past, MPI has done risk assessments on importing products but the
risk of a biosecurity failure has rested with the industry, not MPI. This [decision]
fundamentally changes that. Now MPI [and by proxy the Government] is legally liable
for a biosecurity failure.” The Government Industry Agreements (GIA) to some extent
recognise this in that there is now joint risk in biosecurity breaches, Lees says.“
It is likely that MPI will be more cautions in their risk assessment on imported
goods and more vigilant about incursions. “Significant incursions have occurred 
recently: myrtle rust and Mycoplasma bovis, which indicate the need for more risk
assessment of importation of plant and animal products and better surveillance. 
This decision and the GIAs are likely to help that.” MPI said in a statement when
the High Court decision was released,  that the 500-page document traverses events
dating back 12 years, pre-dating the setting up of MPI and required a thorough examination.“
Once we have completed consideration of the judgement, a decision will be made on
whether to appeal.  That decision must be made by the Solicitor-General, not MPI.”⌊
f1d2f15736d6a0e1be1db2c4d649bffd XL⌉ Dr. Nic Lees