Found liable by a New South Wales court for ‘knowingly assisting’ a fraudulent scheme to divert business revenue from Australian nutritional products company Sunnya Pty Ltd, Auckland food manufacturer Supermega failed in attempts to block enforcement in New Zealand of Sunnya’s Australian court judgment.
The New South Wales Supreme Court ruled Supermega’s West Auckland director Yi Wu was party to a scheme in which false invoicing of Sunnya exports to China had the effect of diverting company revenue to a Sunnya director’s family company.
Supermega manufactures milk product in New Zealand under contract to Sunnya.
Trans-Tasman Proceedings Act allows quick-fire enforcement in New Zealand of judgments from Australian courts. Once registered in New Zealand, an Australian judgment is enforceable as if it were a judgment of a New Zealand court.
In May 2025, Sunnya registered its successful Australian court judgment in New Zealand.
It holds Supermega Market Ltd liable to pay damages for assisting two former Sunnya directors in their scheme, diverting business income from Sunnya.
Australian courts have yet to determine damages payable.
In an unsuccessful challenge to New Zealand registration, Supermega argued the Australian litigation was about trademarks; excluded from trans-Tasman enforcement as ‘immovables,’ it claimed
Land is classified at law as immovable; it cannot be moved from one country to another.
Litigants have similarly argued that intellectual property rights such as patents and trademarks should be treated as ‘immovables,’ since they apply only in the territory where registered. They cannot be enforced outside the country of registration.
Contrary to labelling used by some manufacturers, there is no such thing as worldwide patent rights or trademark rights.
In the New Zealand High Court, Justice Walker ruled Sunnya’s litigation was not in fact a dispute about trademarks, though trademarks were front and centre in some of the disputed evidence. It was at heart a dispute about former Sunnya directors’ breach of fiduciary duty and Supermega’s knowing assistance of their breach, she said.
In any event, New Zealand’s Trade Marks Act treats trademarks as personal property, Justice Walker said. As personal property, they cannot be construed as ‘immovable.’
Sunnya’s Australian court judgment stands enforceable against Supermega Market in New Zealand.
Supermega Market Ltd v. Sunnya Pty Ltd – High Court (14.08.26)
26.233