AgResearch says it is disappointed GE-Free New Zealand has won a court battle to restrict applications to import genetically engineered (GE) material and livestock.
The High Court at Wellington ruled on Friday that the Environmental Risk Management Authority (Erma) had erred in receiving applications for determination under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996.
"I think the error is such that Erma cannot continue to treat the applications as if they were valid," Justice Denis Clifford said.
He ordered that any decisions to accept applications be set aside and Erma stop hearing and assessing any further applications.
GE-Free had taken both Erma and AgResearch to court in March.
AgResearch last year made four applications for the laboratory testing of human and monkey cell lines and smaller species of GE laboratory animals, and the development of GE cows, buffalo, sheep, pigs, goats, llamas, alpacas, deer and horses.
It wanted the livestock to produce antigens, biopharmaceuticals, enzymes, hormones and other products with possible health benefits and commercial applications.
AgResearch said it was making a "suite" of applications to obtain all the possible approvals it might need for research, and animal breeding to target production of high-value proteins in milk.
Today, general manager science and technology Jimmy Suttie said the ruling prevented AgResearch from undertaking transgenicanimal research effectively.
"We are challenged by this procedural issue as we will now lose valuable time in advancing our research and opportunities to capitalise on it."
However, he said AgResearch would revise its applications to Erma and submit alternatives.
"We believe this is necessary to secure for New Zealand the opportunity to do this type of research and provide options for the pastoral industry."
GE-Free spokesman Jon Carapiet hailed the High Court decision as one of the most significant decisions relating to GE in the last decade.
The public and farmers were against the "wholesale approach to genetic engineering of animals", he told NZPA.
Mr Carapiet said the Royal Commission into GE in 2001, and subsequent governments, did not want an "anything, anywhere, anytime, go free and multiply" approach to GE research, but a case by case, careful assessment of the risks and opportunities.
Few GE applications on their own would stand up and AgResearch's suite proposal would have avoided that scrutiny, he said.
The decision would force the applicants and Erma to more fully analyse what they would do with an organism and how they would do it, he said. "It should force AgResearch to really rethink what it is doing in terms of investing money in genetic engineering versus other areas.
The Soil and Health association said the decision was "a victory for New Zealanders" and showed Erma was failing Parliament's intentions.
"Every Erma approved field trial, whether plant or animal, has fallen down on its conditions. For AgResearch to be loosely applying for a veritable zoo to play with, was risky, unethical and went against New Zealand's point of difference in the world: clean green, 100 percent pure and essentially GE Free," said spokesman Steffan Browning.
Erma general manager of new organisms Libby Harrison said the government agency would not comment until it had had time to read and consider the High Court decision.
In the meantime, all work on processing AgResearch applications had stopped.
"We have no other similar applications in process at present."
