Nonna’s Bakehouse ordered to pay Dubbo flour mill $800,000 in unpaid invoices.

A family owned flour mill from the state’s central west has been awarded a hefty payday by the Supreme Court, following a legal stoush with an “artisan” wholesaler baker.

The family run mill has been in Dubbo for 100 years. Picture: Supplied

A family owned flour mill in the state’s central west has been awarded six figures in unpaid invoices, following a Supreme Court legal stoush with a wholesale baker.

Last week, Dubbo millhouse Ben Furney Flour Mills was awarded $800,000 in unpaid invoices, following a breakdown in a business relationship with a former buyer.

Artisan wholesaler Nonna’s Bakehouse was ordered to pay for the 55 orders of flour it allegedly never paid for, along with 10 per cent interest per annum.

In 2017 the mill began supplying flour to the large-scale but “artisan” wholesale baker, which stocks over 100 varieties of baked goods in Aldi, Harris Farm and Woolworths supermarkets nationwide.

The parties continued business together with no major issues until mid 2021, when bakers began complaining of “sticky dough”, water absorption and other inconsistencies.

The Ben Furney Flour Mill was ruled in favour of in the Supreme Court. Picture: Google

Then in September, the bakery’s technical support manager resigned, citing he was unhappy with the direction the business was headed, stating “this isn’t Nonna’s”, a published copy of the Judgement states.

A month later, the bakery introduced a new research and development manager, who brought with him “major changes” to the bakery’s demands for the mill, marking a “significant turning point” in the partnership.

The defendant Nonna's is stocked in major supermarkets nationwide. Picture: Instagram

In February 2022, the mill advised Nonna’s they could not meet the specific requirements being sought by the bakery’s new management.

According to the Judgement, in an email sent to Nonna’s head of research and development, Ben Furney Flour’s chief executive had written:

“I just don’t think I can. Looking at what we’ve got, looking at the numbers our flours are achieving, it’s not there – I don’t think we can get there.”

Despite this, Nonna’s continued to order flour with Ben Furney before beginning to fall behind with payment in April.

By late July both parties had attempted to resolve the issue, with Ben Furney suggesting a payment plan and Nonna’s seeking a reduction in the debt, citing the alleged flour issues.

The next month after failing to strike an agreement, Ben Furney ceased supplying flour to Nonna’s before launching legal action to recoup the money owed.

In response the bakery lodged a $2.5m counterclaim, alleging Ben Furney breached its contract by not meeting specific requirements for flour quality, and selling a substandard product.

However, the counterclaim did not stand up in court after it was found no flour specifications were ever formally agreed upon, meaning Ben Furney could not be in breach of non-existent specifications.

Her Honour Justice Kelly Reese noted the mill had “bent over backwards” to meet the baker’s requirements, which were not “entirely straightforward”, due to the bakery’s changing management and lack of formally stipulated requirements.

Justice Rees also remarked the mill had been so eager to appease the baker’s demands it gave rise to an expected level of performance, which “strayed some distance from the trade”.

Both Ben Furney Flour Mills and Nonna’s Bakehouse were approached for comment.