Key facts
- A federal judge dismissed most of Ben & Jerry's lawsuit against Unilever.
- Magnum will replace Unilever as the primary defendant in the case.
- Claims related to missed payments by Unilever will proceed.
- Ben & Jerry's alleged censorship of its social activism and missed payments totaling $4.5 million.
- The judge ruled that Ben & Jerry's directors cannot sue on behalf of the company for certain claims.
A federal judge has significantly narrowed a lawsuit filed by Ben & Jerry's against its former parent company, Unilever, dismissing most of the ice cream maker's claims that Unilever attempted to silence its social activism and dismantle its board. U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel ruled that while claims related to the company's operations and board appointments were dismissed, two claims concerning missed payments by Unilever could proceed.
Magnum, the Amsterdam-based company that acquired Ben & Jerry's when it was spun off from Unilever last year, will now take Unilever's place as the primary defendant. The original merger agreement in 2000 had granted Ben & Jerry's substantial autonomy, including an independent board and the ability to pursue its social mission.
The dispute escalated in 2021 when Ben & Jerry's decided to cease sales in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The company accused Unilever of violating the merger agreement by censoring its speech, including protests against the war in Gaza and planned criticism of then-President Donald Trump. Ben & Jerry's also alleged that Unilever failed to make two payments totaling $4.5 million as part of a 2022 settlement concerning trademark rights in Israel.
Unilever denied censoring Ben & Jerry's, stating that the former chief executive who supported the company's activism had resigned voluntarily. Judge Castel determined that the merger agreement's language did not grant Ben & Jerry's directors the right to sue on behalf of the company regarding director appointments or removals, though they may challenge new board eligibility requirements and sue over missed payments in their own capacity.
In a separate but related legal battle, Unilever and Magnum are seeking to dismiss a defamation lawsuit filed by Anuradha Mittal, who was removed as chair of Ben & Jerry's independent board last December. Mittal alleges the companies defamed her for supporting Palestinian rights.