What the 2025 Grocery Supply Code means for suppliers

Big changes to the Grocery Supply Code take effect on 1 May — and if you supply groceries to one of New Zealand's regulated retailers, it's worth knowing what's new. The 2025 Code has been designed with suppliers in mind. It strengthens existing protections in several important areas and adds new ones. Here's a plain-language breakdown.
Author(s): Michael Jamieson

You're better protected against retaliation

Protection against retailer retaliation has always existed under the Grocery Industry Cooperation Act (GICA), but the 2025 Code makes it more explicit. A new clause (clause 30) says clearly: if you exercise a right under the Code, or even indicate that you might, a retailer cannot take any action that is detrimental to you as a result.

The Code lists examples of what detrimental action looks like — delisting your products, changing their in-store or online placement, cancelling orders, reducing restocking, or terminating your supply contract. That list isn’t exhaustive.

Critically, this protection extends to your interactions with the Commerce Commission and the Grocery Industry Dispute Resolution Scheme. You can contact NZDRC to explore your options, raise concerns, or start a dispute process without fear that doing so will be used against you. The onus is on the retailer to prove that any action it takes is driven by genuine commercial reasons — not retaliation.

Investment buying is addressed

“Investment buying” — where a retailer over-orders stock at a promotional price and then sells the excess at full price after the promotion ends — has long been a frustration for suppliers. The 2025 Code deals with this directly. From 1 May, if a retailer engages in this practice, it must repay you the portion of your promotional funding that relates to the over ordered stock.

Charging for wastage is no longer permitted

Under the 2023 Code, retailers were generally prevented from passing wastage costs on to suppliers once those goods were out of the supplier’s control — but supply agreements could carve out exceptions. That carve-out has been removed. Clause 14 of the 2025 Code makes it a blanket prohibition: if the groceries are no longer in your hands, the retailer cannot charge you for wastage. This now aligns with how shrinkage is treated.

What this means in practice

These changes collectively shift more accountability onto retailers and give suppliers clearer grounds to push back when things go wrong. Enhanced record-keeping requirements will also make it easier for the Commerce Commission to scrutinise retailer decision-making.

If you’re in a dispute with a retailer — or wondering whether you might be heading toward one — NZDRC administers the Grocery Industry Dispute Resolution Scheme and can help you understand your options. Visit grocerydispute.co.nz to find out more.

Other resources you might like

If you found this article helpful and are interested in learning more, there is a wealth of other resources available on our website. We have a wide array of articles and guides on a variety of topics, each designed to provide you with a deeper understanding of the subject matter. We encourage you to explore these resources and deepen your knowledge.

A small wooden boat named "Lady Irene" rests on a pebble beach with the sea and a partly cloudy sky in the background. The boat is slightly elevated on wooden supports, and its rich, polished wood contrasts with the light-colored pebbles.
General

Ten years in a leaky boat: Lucky just to keep afloat

In 1982 Split Enz released its now famous single Six Months in a Leaky Boat being a reference to the time it took pioneers to sail to New Zealand (it had nothing at all to do with being an attack on Britain’s invasion of the Falkland Islands which caused the BBC to discourage airplay of the song in Britain during the Falklands War – it was recorded in January 1982, months before the Falklands invasion). It has also been suggested that the lyrics are a metaphor for a relationship that could not be, the need to put our differences behind us and that there is a world to explore after ’the ship-wreck’, and to keep on trying where there’s wind in our sails. Neil Finn’s lyrics and the sentiment embodied in the song provide a strikingly apposite segue into the relationship property story that follows.
Learn more
A Chinese airplane can be seen arriving from New Zealand.
Arb-Med, General

ReSolution Wrap-Up – the latest in Asia-Pacific regional agreements

RCEP is growing and more countries are signing up to the Singapore Convention – Alex and Alice track some recent changes to international agreements concerning the Asia-Pacific region.
Learn more
A person wearing a face mask is sitting in a dark room, illuminated by their laptop screen. Their hands are typing on the keyboard, perhaps drafting contracts or seeking insight from overseas courts during the pandemics lockdowns.
General

Pandemics, lockdowns and contracts – can overseas courts give us any insight?

When the COVID-19 pandemic first arrived in New Zealand, there was widespread discussion amongst the legal community about the impact the pandemic and the Government “lockdowns” might have on contracts.[1] Two main avenues for obtaining contractual relief were explored: the doctrine of frustration, and force majeure clauses.

With the recent move into a Level 4 lockdown, it’s timely for us to revisit our thinking on this. Have the courts been able to fill in some of the gaps we had in our understanding of how COVID-19 might affect contracts? Interestingly, there has been little comment from the courts on these matters – perhaps parties have reached settlement, or perhaps the disputes are still making their way through the backlogged courts. However, we do have two cases to consider: one from Ireland, and one from Wales.
Learn more

Get in touch

Contact our team today to see how we can help

Contact us

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.