Ben & Jerry’s loses bid to block ice cream’s sale in West Bank

Ben & Jerry’s lost an unusual bid to block its corporate parent, Unilever Plc, from going forward with a deal to allow its ice cream to be sold in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The Vermont-based ice cream maker claimed in a suit that Unilever’s sale of its brand and trademark in Israel to a local company violated the 2000 agreement by which the consumer products giant acquired Ben & Jerry’s and runs against its “core values.” Unilever maintained that the agreement gave Ben & Jerry’s no power to challenge the deal, which closed in June. A lawyer for Ben & Jerry’s had no immediate comment on the ruling. Unilever didn’t immediately return emails seeking comment. U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr. in Manhattan on Monday denied Ben & Jerry’s request for a preliminary injunction, saying the ice cream maker failed to show that it would suffer irreparable harm if the deal wasn’t blocked. Carter said Ben & Jerry’s claim that the deal might lead to new products conveying a message contrary to the brand’s was “too speculative.” Sign up for Ad Age newsletters From influencer marketing to agencies, get the latest news and analysis delivered to your inbox Click here Political controversy Unilever sold the Israeli rights to businessman Avi Zinger in response to Ben & Jerry’s decision to halt sales in the West Bank over human-rights concerns. The move triggered a political controversy, with Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett warning Unilever at the time that the “blatantly anti-Israel” decision would have “serious repercussions, legal and otherwise.” After several investors announced boycotts and divestments of Unilever, the consumer products giant in June announced the sale of Ben & Jerry’s business interests in Israel to Zinger, the owner of American Quality Products Ltd. The deal was intended to allow Ben and Jerry’s ice cream to be sold throughout Israel, including the West Bank, with Hebrew and Arabic names on the packaging. Ben & Jerry’s, which has a history of publicly embracing socially progressive causes like same-sex marriage and the Black Lives Matter movement, said the deal would fly in the face of its brand image. “This is an American institution that has built its reputation on the authenticity of its social mission,” a lawyer for Ben & Jerry’s argued in an Aug. 8 phone hearing before Carter. The ice cream maker claimed that an independent board created at the time of its acquisition was empowered to decide whether the transaction is consistent with its brand. Unilever said it recognized the role of the Ben & Jerry’s board in making decisions about the brand’s “social mission” but said it retained authority over financial and operational matters, including the sale to Zinger. The case is Ben & Jerry’s Homemade Inc. v. Conopco Inc., 22-cv-05681, US District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan). —Bloomberg News Subscribe to Ad Age Sign up now for the latest industry news and analysis Click here

Ben & Jerry’s loses bid to block ice cream’s sale in West Bank

Featured Stories