News Case law
Bel Leerdammer farmer is entitled to membership fees
The court in Rotterdam has expressed its opinion (via an interim judgment) about the protracted lawsuit between Bel Leerdammer and the dairy farmers. This shows that these dairy farmers could assume that the membership fee was part of the promised reference price.
Bel Leerdammer has been at odds with 313 dairy farmers who supply the dairy for some time now. The suppliers claim that they received too little milk money between 2010 and 2015 and are now demanding compensation for this.
No membership fee paid
In the period between 2010 and 2015, the milk price of Bel Leerdammer was related to that of FrieslandCampina, DOC Kaas, Cono and the then Nemelco; 3 of these dairy processors are cooperatives and pay members' fees. Bel Leerdammer's dairy farmers report that the membership fee was not reflected in the reference price and are now demanding a damage amount of approximately €15 million. Bel Leerdammer refutes this and says that the plaintiffs should have understood that the membership fee is not part of the reference price, as the company is not a cooperative.
In the interlocutory judgment, the judge says that suppliers of Bel Leerdammer could reasonably assume that the membership fee was part of the reference price. The court ruled in favor of the suppliers. Lawyer Dinant te Biesebeek (van Te Biesebeek Advocaten from Zwolle) represents the dairy farmers and says that the interim judgment has a positive effect on his clients. "We already knew we had a strong case and this interlocutory judgment confirms our thoughts."
Deviating from reference price
The suppliers also state that Bel Leerdammer was not allowed to deviate from the reference price, but that has been done in practice. This argument is invalidated by the judge in the interlocutory judgment. The court states that Bel Leerdammer was allowed to deviate from the reference price on the basis of market conditions.
The documents show that Bel Leerdammer paid out more than the reference price between 2010 and 2013, and less in 2014 and 2015. For example, the average milk price in 2010 was €0,65 more than the reference price, while the payment price in 2015 was €1,50 below the reference. The suppliers say that they did not receive the 'surcharge' between 2010 and 2013. Bel Leerdammer claims that this amount is discounted in the payout price.
Although the dairy farmers were of the opinion that Bel Leerdammer should not deviate from the reference price, according to Te Biesebeek, the interim judgment does not have a negative effect on its clients. This is because Bel Leerdammer apparently saw reason to deviate positively from the reference price. They therefore want to lay claim to an additional claim of €5 million. At this point, however, the introduction of the generic burden of proof becomes complex, because the reference price is calculated on the basis of fat and protein contents, any pasture premiums and supplements (on the basis of annual deliveries). These differ per dairy farm.
Company Specific Calculation
Bel Leerdammer is now given the opportunity by the court to pass on the reference price at company level. The cheesemaker has until September 4, 2019 to decide whether they want to submit a calculation to the court. They then have until 2 October to submit a calculation. The spokesperson for Bel Leerdammer does not want to respond substantively to the interim judgment.
Te Biesebeek estimates that the final verdict will probably take a while. "That could be 2020." Although the dairy farmers probably need clarity, they only see the amount owed rise further (provided they are found to be in the right). In the intervening period, the amount of the receivables increases at an interest rate of 8% per annum.
Wouter Job
© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.