Australian competition authorities are seeking expert opinion from the United Kingdom in a case they are pursuing against egg producers in Western Australia and New South Wales.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has launched legal action against certain egg producers because it claims that their description of their eggs as free range is misleading. Legal proceedings have been initiated against Snowdale Holdings Pty Ltd in Western Australia and Pirovic Enterprises Pty Ltd in NSW. The ACCC claims the producers’ eggs are from hens that are not able to move about freely on an open range each day.
Farming UK understands that the ACCC has sought scientific opinion from the United Kingdom in order to prove its case. One of the experts approached by the ACCC is Christine Nicol, professor of animal welfare in the School of Veterinary Sciences at the University of Bristol. Christine has carried out extensive research into laying hens and is leading the current trials taking place on the use of beak trimming in commercial flocks. Her team was commissioned to show how a commercial egg production unit may be able to operate without the use of beak trimming.
Christine confirmed to Farming UK that she had been approached by the ACCC and that she had provided some written evidence. She said she had provided some answers to written questions from Australia about issues like stocking density and ranging.
Reports from Australia suggest that the ACCC had applied to the court to use a video link to produce expert evidence from the UK in the case against Pirovic Enterprises. The Association of Corporate Counsel in Australia said that the ACCC had applied to produce video link evidence because an expert witness was not willing to travel to Australia from the UK. This, it said, was because, “she had teaching and other academic commitments throughout the year and if required to travel to Australia she would need to obtain a period of approximately two weeks free of all other commitments, she had booked an annual holiday in September (overlapping the second week of trial) and would not be able to travel in the period immediately prior to her leave, she found long distance travel physically discomforting and would not be able to travel to Australia from the United Kingdom and appear in court the next day or the day after.”
Christine told the Farming UK that she would not be providing video evidence - only written evidence in response to questions. “I have provided written opinion in response to specific questions.” However, she said she thought others in the UK had been contacted. “I don’t think I am the only one who has been approached,” she said. In any event, the ACCC’s application to use video link evidence was rejected by the court.
When the legal action was launched by the ACCC, its chairman, Rod Sims, said, “The ACCC does not have a role in determining whether particular farming practices are appropriate and the ACCC is not debating the merits of cage, barn or free range systems.
“The ACCC’s concern is simply to ensure that the labelling of eggs accurately reflects the particular farming practices of the producer and the expectations of a consumer making purchasing choices based on those representations.” He said, “Credence claims such as free range, organic, place of origin or country of origin are all powerful tools for businesses to distinguish their products, but misleading consumers who may pay a premium to purchase such products damages the market and is unfair to competitors.
“These matters form part of a continuing investigation by the ACCC into free range claims made by egg producers, which has involved the ACCC serving substantiation notices on a number of egg producers that supply eggs labelled as free range.”
Pirovic is one of the largest independent egg producers in New South Wales and supplies eggs labelled as cage, barn laid, free range and organic free range. It also sells a variety of liquid egg products to retailers nationally. Snowdale, which is one of Western Australia’s largest egg producers, also supplies eggs marked as cage, barn and free range.
The ACCC says it is concerned that there are attributes of the farming systems used by some egg producers in Australia that indicate that the eggs should not be labelled as free range. It says that a free range claim by any producer is a representation that the eggs were produced by hens that were able to move freely on an open range each day and most of the hens did in fact move freely on that open range.
The ACCC says it understands that there are a number of farming conditions that impact on whether hens are able to, and do, move freely on an open range each day. Those conditions, it says, include the internal stocking density of sheds; the conditions of the internal areas the hens are housed in; the number, size and location of any openings to an outdoor area; the time of the day and how regularly the openings are opened; the size and condition of the outdoor area, including any shaded areas, the presence of food, water and different vegetation and ground conditions; the stocking density of any outdoor area; and whether the hens have been trained or conditioned to remain indoors. The ACCC says that the conditions and their impact vary between producers and no single condition of itself is conclusive. It will, apparently, be seeking to produce expert opinion on the impact of such conditions.
The commission is seeking declarations, injunctions, pecuniary penalties, implementation of compliance programmes, corrective notices and costs against each producer.
