Judge narrows Ben & Jerry's lawsuit accusing Unilever of silencing social activism
A federal judge dismissed most claims in Ben & Jerry's lawsuit against Unilever, leaving only allegations of missed payments.Summary
U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel dismissed seven of ten claims in a lawsuit by Ben & Jerry's and its independent directors against Unilever, which alleged that the parent company attempted to silence the ice cream maker's social activism, dismantle its independent board, and stop funding its foundation. The judge ruled that the merger agreement did not grant the directors or foundation standing to sue on behalf of the company regarding censorship or board appointments. However, two claims survive in full: allegations that Unilever failed to pay $2.5 million to Ben & Jerry's and $2 million to support Palestinian almond farmers under a 2022 settlement over trademark rights in Israel. The directors may pursue these missed-payment claims on their own behalf and can also challenge new board eligibility requirements. Magnum, the Amsterdam-based company that acquired Ben & Jerry's in a spin-off last year, replaces Unilever as the primary defendant. The dispute stems from tensions after Ben & Jerry's 2021 decision to halt sales in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. A separate defamation suit by ousted board chair Anuradha Mittal is also pending.
(Source：Reuters)