MPI’s insurance arrangement on Psa to be released

Court ruling orders MPI to release details of its insurance arrangements in relation to the 2009 Psa outbreak

MPI’s insurance arrangement on Psa to be released

Insurance News

By

A dispute between a group of kiwifruit growers and the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) over the 2009 Psa disaster has resulted in the agency being ordered to release its insurance arrangements during a 12-week trial. 

BusinessDesk reported that the growers are seeking over $376 million in compensation. Psa infected 80% of New Zealand kiwifruit orchards and is estimated to have cost the industry up to $930 million in lost exports.
 
Growers are claiming the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF), which was incorporated into MPI in 2012, when MPI was formed, is negligent under the Biosecurity Act.

The chairman of the kiwifruit claim, John Cameron, said it was important that all New Zealand primary industries know what insurance arrangements the Crown has for acts of negligence and biosecurity breaches.

“We think it’s reasonable to question why MPI is insured against acts of negligence if they
believe they don’t owe a duty of care to the primary industries it is meant to protect,” Cameron said.

“Traditionally in litigation well-resourced defendants with liability insurance have not had to disclose details of their cover. This places plaintiffs at a serious disadvantage when seeking to access justice through the courts when up against well-resourced defendants who have the means to use the legal system to test the financial resolve of plaintiffs through delaying tactics.”

MPI’s lawyers said the Crown has “limited liability insurance cover relating to this claim” and the “maximum sum available is a modest fraction of the sum claimed by the plaintiffs. For the large balance the Crown is self-insured.”

Wellington High Court Justice Jillian Mallon ruled that the court had had “incorrect evidence” about whether MPI had insurance, and now that has been corrected, the kiwifruit growers should have the opportunity to understand the extent and nature of the insurance held.

Once that has been done, each side will make submissions about whether the court should consider the availability of insurance in ruling on the case.

Keep up with the latest news and events

Join our mailing list, it’s free!