Ben & Jerry’s has been operating in Israel since 1987, but in recent years has come under pressure for sales in West Bank settlements, which are considered illegal under international law. In July 2021, it announced it would stop sales in the West Bank altogether. That sparked a dispute with its longtime distributor in Israel, American Quality Products (AQP), which sued Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever in March, claiming they were “illegally ending its 34-year business relationship to boycott Israel.” . Unilever, one of the world’s top sellers of consumer goods including Dove soap and Magnum ice cream, sought to draw a line on the controversy by announcing last week that it had sold Ben & Jerry’s Israeli business for an undisclosed sum to AQP . The retail giant said that going forward, Ben & Jerry’s will be sold under its Hebrew and Arabic names throughout Israel and the West Bank. But that decision to sell to AQP caught Ben & Jerry’s board by surprise, according to its court filing, which said its chair was “giddy” when it heard the news. As of 2021, Ben & Jerry’s has strongly opposed selling its products in the West Bank, saying it would be “inconsistent” with the brand. In its complaint on Tuesday, it noted that its brand values are legally overseen by an independent board under a 2000 agreement with Unilever. The board decided to pursue legal action last week at a meeting where five directors voted to approve the lawsuit and two Unilever appointees dissented, Ben & Jerry’s said. In a statement last week, Unilever acknowledged that “Ben & Jerry’s and its independent board had rights to make decisions about its social mission.” However, it argued that the parent company “reserves primary responsibility for financial and operational decisions, and therefore has the right to enter into this agreement.” In a new statement on Wednesday, a Unilever spokesman reiterated that it “had the right to enter into this agreement.” “The deal is already closed,” the spokesman said, adding that he would not comment on pending disputes. In its statement last week, Unilever said it had been reviewing its operations there “for several months, including with the Israeli government”. “Unilever used the opportunity last year to listen to perspectives on this complex and sensitive issue and believes this is the best outcome for Ben & Jerry’s in Israel,” he added. — Jordan Valinsky contributed to this report.
title: “Ben Jerry S Is Suing Unilever To Block The Sale Of Israeli Businesses " ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-28” author: “Jean Dunning”
Ben & Jerry’s has been operating in Israel since 1987, but in recent years has come under pressure for sales in West Bank settlements, which are considered illegal under international law. In July 2021, it announced it would stop sales in the West Bank altogether. That sparked a dispute with its longtime distributor in Israel, American Quality Products (AQP), which sued Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever in March, claiming they were “illegally ending its 34-year business relationship to boycott Israel.” . Unilever, one of the world’s top sellers of consumer goods including Dove soap and Magnum ice cream, sought to draw a line on the controversy by announcing last week that it had sold Ben & Jerry’s Israeli business for an undisclosed sum to AQP . The retail giant said that going forward, Ben & Jerry’s will be sold under its Hebrew and Arabic names throughout Israel and the West Bank. But that decision to sell to AQP caught Ben & Jerry’s board by surprise, according to its court filing, which said its chair was “giddy” when it heard the news. As of 2021, Ben & Jerry’s has strongly opposed selling its products in the West Bank, saying it would be “inconsistent” with the brand. In its complaint on Tuesday, it noted that its brand values are legally overseen by an independent board under a 2000 agreement with Unilever. The board decided to pursue legal action last week at a meeting where five directors voted to approve the lawsuit and two Unilever appointees dissented, Ben & Jerry’s said. In a statement last week, Unilever acknowledged that “Ben & Jerry’s and its independent board had rights to make decisions about its social mission.” However, it argued that the parent company “reserves primary responsibility for financial and operational decisions, and therefore has the right to enter into this agreement.” In a new statement on Wednesday, a Unilever spokesman reiterated that it “had the right to enter into this agreement.” “The deal is already closed,” the spokesman said, adding that he would not comment on pending disputes. In its statement last week, Unilever said it had been reviewing its operations there “for several months, including with the Israeli government”. “Unilever has used the opportunity of the past year to listen to perspectives on this complex and sensitive issue and believes this is the best outcome for Ben & Jerry’s in Israel,” he added. — Jordan Valinsky contributed to this report.
