Newsletter
Newsletter Support JNS

Class-action suit launched against Unilever over Ben & Jerry’s boycott

The company omitted Ben & Jerry’s boycott decision, made in July 2020, from its disclosures because it knew it could create significant downside for the company, according to the complaint.

Ben & Jerry's berry sorbet on a chocolate-almond cone. Credit: Kate33/Shutterstock.
Ben & Jerry’s berry sorbet on a chocolate-almond cone. Credit: Kate33/Shutterstock.

A U.S. shareholder filed a class-action suit against Unilever Plc in New York federal court on Wednesday, claiming the British-based global consumer goods company concealed a boycott of Israel by its Ben & Jerry’s ice cream brand that shaved billions off its stock market value.

The suit, filed by The City of St. Clair Shores Police and Fire Retirement System, a Michigan retirement fund, asserts that Unilever hid a decision of Ben & Jerry’s board of directors to stop selling its products in areas it considered illegally occupied by Israel. Although Ben & Jerry’s is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Unilever, it maintains an independent board, focused on the company’s social mission.

The complaint says that Unilever omitted the July 2020 Ben & Jerry’s boycott decision from its disclosures because it knew it could create a significant downside for the company. The decision did not become public until Ben & Jerry’s announced it on Twitter and on its website about a year later, on July 19, 2021.

The ice-cream maker’s decision “appears to arise out of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (“BDS”) movement,” the complaint states. It noted the BDS movement is “controversial,” pointing to a U.S. House of Representatives resolution on July 24, 2019, condemning BDS by a vote of 398-17.

“Additionally, and of particular significance here, 35 U.S. states have adopted laws, executive orders, or resolutions aimed at discouraging boycotts, divestment, and sanctions of Israel (“Anti-BDS Legislation”),” the suit continues.

“Unilever thus had ample reason to conceal the B&J Board resolution and thereafter to mischaracterize it once Unilever’s hand-selected CEO finally ‘operationalized’ it,” it continues.

New York, New Jersey, Florida, Texas, Illinois, Colorado and Arizona, ultimately divested their pension fund holdings in Unilever, according to the suit, and the market value of Unilever “suffered significant losses and damages” as a result.

In addition to Unilever, company CEO Alan Jope, Chief Legal Officer and Group Secretary Ritva Sotamaa and Chairman and a Director Nils Andersen, among others, are named as individual defendants.

This suit was filed on behalf of anyone who acquired Unilever American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”) between Sept. 2, 2020 and July 21, 2021.

“I’m seeing an intensity of antisemitic attacks,” Gov. Ned Lamont told JNS. “A lot of it is energized by what’s happening in the Middle East and on social media.”
The prime minister’s office said that the U.S. president committed to a final deal that will include removal of nuclear material, dismantling enrichment facilities, limits on missiles and halting Iran’s support for terror proxies.
The ruling follows a Board of Immigration Appeals determination that Mohsen Mahdawi is deportable, a decision he is now challenging in federal court.
Rabbi Raphi Steiner told JNS that he worries that his son is growing up in an environment “wondering why some hater decided it would be a good idea to write on his shul that Jews don’t belong here.”
“Based on the fact that discussions with the Islamic Republican of Iran have been brought to the highest level of Iranian leadership and approved, I have, as president of the United States of America, canceled the scheduled strikes and bombings against Iran this evening,” the president said.
Michael and David Shabsels, who operate 30 camps across four states, reported up to $1 billion in liabilities as a New Jersey court approved continued access to funds to keep camps operating.