The WTO ruled Australian quarantine and safety checks on New Zealand apples were unscientific and disrupted trade, and that New Zealand's rights under global trade law had been damaged.
"Australia has vigorously defended its science-based quarantine system throughout this dispute. The government is committed to maintaining the integrity of Australia's quarantine regime," Australia's Agriculture Minister Tony Burke and Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said in a joint statement.
Australia banned New Zealand apples in 1921 because of fears that fire blight, a disease that attacks apple and pear trees, as well as rose bushes, could spread. Wellington has tried to have the ban lifted since 1986, and began a challenge at the WTO in 2007.
The WTO ruling could open the way for New Zealand to resume sales of apples to its biggest trading partner after nearly 90 years, and holds out the possibility of access to other Asian markets where its apples are banned for similar reasons.
Smith and Burke said their government, currently in the middle of an election campaign, believed there were adequate grounds to appeal and current restrictions on New Zealand apples would remain in place pending the outcome of an appeal late this year.
The conservative opposition, behind in polls but within striking distance of victory, said it would also press an appeal if it won the August 21 election.
"Our clean, green, disease-free status is vital to our way of life and the coalition will fight the WTO ruling with everything we have," agriculture spokesman John Cobb said.
New Zealand officials estimate that lifting the Australian ban could add NZ$30 million ($22 million) within two to three years to apple exports totalling NZ$400 million in 2009.
But the ruling could also open other markets, according to industry lobby Pipfruit New Zealand, with Wellington facing particular problems with Japanese and South Korean hurdles against fire blight.
New Zealand exports 75-80 percent of its annual crop of about 400,000 tonnes, mainly to Europe and especially Germany and Britain, as well as to the United States and Asia, notably Taiwan.
The ruling could also crack open the Australian fruit market to imports from other suppliers, such as the United States and Chile, the world's third-biggest apple exporter. (Reuters)
