High Court Dismisses Sorghum Growers’ Appeal Against Advanta Seeds

Australian High Court Upholds Lower Court Rulings, Finds No Duty of Care Owed by Seed Company

The High Court of Australia has dismissed an appeal made by a group of sorghum growers from Queensland and New South Wales against the seed company Advanta Seeds. The growers, who claimed that a sorghum seed product they purchased was contaminated with shattercane, had sought to hold the company accountable for alleged negligence that they argued led to significant crop damage and economic losses.

The growers, led by Andrew Jenner, trading as Mallonland Pty Ltd, and ME & JL Nitschke Pty Ltd, initially launched a class action against Advanta Seeds (then Pacific Seeds) in 2017, representing approximately 100 sorghum growers. They claimed that the contaminated seed, sold between 2010 and 2014, resulted in widespread shattercane infestations across roughly 28,000 hectares of land, causing an estimated $105 million in losses.

Despite these claims, the High Court upheld the rulings of the Supreme Court of Queensland and the Court of Appeals, finding that Advanta Seeds did not owe the growers a duty of care. The court noted that the warnings and information printed on the seed product’s packaging clearly stated that the seed had a minimum purity of 99 percent and could contain up to 1 percent of other plant matter. As such, the court determined that no duty of care could arise from the circumstances because the potential for impurities was explicitly acknowledged by the warnings on the product packaging.

The judgment also highlighted that, while it was “reasonably foreseeable” that the growers could suffer economic loss if reasonable care was not taken in the production process, Advanta Seeds did not know that the seed it sold was contaminated. The court acknowledged that Advanta had failed to meet the standard of care expected of a reasonable producer by not growing out the contaminated seed in the originating production block. However, it ultimately ruled that this failure did not constitute a breach of duty that would result in liability.

Despite the plaintiffs’ loss, the case underscores the complexities involved in agricultural product liability and the challenges that growers face in holding suppliers accountable for product contamination. While the court recognized the growers’ economic losses, it found that the legal framework did not support their claims against Advanta Seeds under the circumstances presented.

Error

High Court Dismisses Sorghum Growers’ Appeal Against Advanta Seeds

Kira Demina

Prime Agricultural Properties for Sale Across Southern Australia: A Spring Opportunity

Newsletter

GRDC Urges Growers to Assess Farm Silos Ahead of Harvest

High-Yield Corn Harvest in Komarichi District Boosts Grain Reserves Despite Weather Challenges

Daily Market Wire: Crop Prices and Global Updates for July 29, 2024

Kursk Region’s Grain Exports Surge in First Half of 2024

Australian Wheat Exports in June 2024: Seasonal Decline and Market Dynamics

Protect Your Wheat: Timely Irrigation Can Prevent Devastating Fungus Attacks

Infested Imported Rice in Bulog Warehouses: What It Means for Farmers and Food Security

Australian Wheat Exports Decline as End of Marketing Year Approaches

Tumen County’s Sweet Success: The Rise of Fresh Corn as a New Agricultural Powerhouse

Navigating Shifts in Turkey’s Wheat Import Policies: Impacts on Domestic Production and Global Trade

Welcome Back!

Retrieve your password