Unilever PLC

Magnum Ice Cream Company has welcomed a US court decision that significantly narrows a lawsuit brought by former Ben & Jerry's independent directors over the ice-cream brand's activism and governance changes. Judge Kevin Castel of the federal court in Manhattan on Friday dismissed seven of the ten counts and trimmed another, while holding that Magnum, the Amsterdam-headquartered ice-cream business created from Unilever's spin-off last year, should stand as the main defendant in place of the FMCG conglomerate. The case was filed by former Class I directors linked to Ben & Jerry's independent board, accusing Unilever and Magnum of breaching commitments dating back to the UK-listed group's 2000 acquisition of the US ice-cream brand, under which Ben & Jerry's retained unusual protections around its board structure, social mission and foundation. Two claims that remain in full relate to previous settlement agreements with Unilever, and a further claim that partially survives relates solely to an ongoing governance dispute, including allegations tied to missed payments under a 2022 settlement over the sale of Ben & Jerry's trademark rights in Israel. Magnum said the decision to drop Ben & Jerry's from the case rightly demonstrates that the former directors had no right to sue on behalf of Ben & Jerry's, which is thriving under TMICC's ownership, and that the judge has ruled only on whether there is legal basis for the claim to proceed, not on their merits.