Western Australian produce companies, Fruitico Pty Ltd and Fresh Express Produce Pty Ltd, have each paid the maximum penalty of $99,000 for alleged breaches of the Horticulture Code – which the federal government recently initiated an independent review for after almost a decade without update.
Fruitico is a Western Australian grower, buyer and wholesaler of table grapes, processing about 80 per cent of Western Australia’s table grapes each year. Fresh Express is a wholesaler of a wide range of horticulture produce with a presence in the Perth markets.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) alleges that Fruitico traded with table grape growers without having a Code‑compliant horticulture produce agreement in place, and separately alleges that wholesaler Fresh Express failed to provide required gross sale price information to growers in statements about the sale of produce, as required by the Code.
The organisation announced on 4 June it had issued each business with five infringement notices, and both Fruitico and Fresh Express paid the maximum penalties of $99,000.
ACCC deputy chair, Mick Keogh, said growers need clear, timely information about how prices are set and how their produce is sold.
“Agreements that don’t meet the Code’s minimum standards reduce transparency and prevent growers from accessing essential information about their trading relationship and produce sales,” said Keogh.
“All horticultural traders should be on notice that we are monitoring their compliance with the Code and will take enforcement action where necessary.”
The Horticulture Code is a mandatory industry code applying to trade between growers and traders, which aims to improve clarity and transparency in horticulture transactions. It hasn't been updated since its introduction in 2017, and is currently under independent review to examine potential improvements and allow stakeholders to consider competition issues facing the sector.
The review will advise government on whether the Code should sunset in April 2027 or be remade, with a final report expected by mid-2026.
The ACCC stated its concern that current Code requirements do not always give growers the clear, timely information they need, and may enable less transparent practices across the supply chain. The organisation's submission in response to the initial consultation recommended changes to prohibit merchants from setting the price they pay for the purchase of the grower’s horticulture produce as an amount calculated by method or formula, and require traders to provide substantially more detailed and timely information to growers about the sale of produce sold on their behalf.
“Measures such as strengthening pricing transparency, banning the use of opaque pricing methods, and requiring grower statements to show clearer pricing details would help growers to more easily check outcomes and understand returns,” said Keogh.
“Providing more detailed and timely sale information, for example, buyer details, price, sale date and any relationship between trader and buyer, would also allow growers to better compare terms between wholesalers and enhance competition in the market.”
The first court action the ACCC took under the Horticulture Code was in June 2018, initiating proceedings against Mitolo Group over unfair terms in its contracts with potato farmers. Stuart Dickson Produce, Grape Co Australia, Green Endeavour, Bache Bros, Nutrano Produce Group, GetFresh Merchants, Total Food Network, and Galati have also all paid penalties due to infringements of the code.
