Member log in

Pengxin brushes off Fay appeal

The Michael Fay led consortium has taken more legal action in an attempt to block the sale to Shanghai Pengxin.

In the High Court in Auckland the Fay group’s challenge the Overseas Investment Office (OIO) had not correctly applied the benefits test was upheld by Justice Forrest Miller but its challenge Shanghai Pengxin did not have the business experience or acumen to run the farms was dismissed.

The Fay group yesterday filed a Court of Appeal action challenging the decision, arguing Shanghai Pengxin were a construction company and property developers, the group’s spokesman Alan McDonald says.

“We are happy with the outcome of the High Court decision but our group remains concerned the OIO did not correctly apply the business experience and acumen test and that why they are taking this opportunity to file the appeal,” Mr McDonald says.

If the test had been applied correctly Shanghai Pengxin would need to demonstrate dairy farm experience and the groups QC Alan Galbraith argued effectively what the OIO was saying was Microsoft could come along and buy dairy farms, he says.

But it was about time people were reminded this wasn’t a central North Island grass growing competition, Shanghai Pengxin spokesman Cedric Allan says.

“What we’re talking about is breaking into the Chinese market with some high value consumer goods instead of continuing to export the bulk of our milk production in milk powder and encouraging investment from China, the dairy farms just a means for an end,” Mr Allan says.

The business plan was not to move from Shanghai and become dairy farmers, he says.

“A feeling seems to exist somehow this a two horse competition for the farms, the truth of the matter is we’ve brought the farms subject only to government approval, which we’re confident we are going to get,” Mr Allan says.

He noted that the OIO would monitor how the farms were being dealt with if the deal was approved and acknowledged Fay’s group had the right to take any legal action they wanted.

But Mr McDonald argued they did not have the experience or acumen.

“Our view is that Shanghai Pengxin does not have relevant experience, they’ve admitted that and that’s why they’ve hired Landcorp to run the farms for them,” he says.

Uncertainty over Iwi occupiers

It was too early to comment on any decisions surrounding the Iwi’s occupation of farmland they claim is ancestral, Mr Allan says.

“We have had discussions with various Iwi in the North Island, which have been very courteous and very pleasant and we would want to be good neighbours but it is too early to start talking detail,” he says.

The Fay group is neutral on the occupation, Mr McDonald says.

Other than the occupiers neighbouring one of the group members farmland there was no connection or public view with in the group, Mr McDonald
 

More by Conor O'Brien

Signup to free NBR email alerts here

Comments and questions
2

Wonder if comparatively poor Sir Michael FAY can afford to match any more unforeseen legal fees should the wealthy Chinese Company (perhaps assisted by the world's richest Chinese Government) realises that it has no other choice but to take this case through the higher courts.....

In response to Poor Kiwi | Wednesday, February 22, 2012 - 4:19pm

It is incumbent on parliament to frame its regulations clearly. It is wrong that parliament brings in legislation that is so easily misinterpreted and ends up in court and costing everybody dearly.

Post new comment or question

Login to use your NBR member name
Full HTML is not supported but you can use the following tags in your comments:
Link: <url>link</url>
Quote: <quote>text</quote>