Ben & Jerry’s has stated its chief government, David Stever, was being eliminated by its mum or dad firm, Unilever, in a rising dispute over the ice cream firm’s political activism.
The allegation was a part of a authorized case filed in a US courtroom by Ben & Jerry’s that claims Unilever violated a merger settlement by attempting to silence its “social mission”.
Unilever didn’t instantly reply to a request for remark from BBC Information.
It comes a month after the ice cream firm accused Unilever of demanding that it stops publicly criticising US President Donald Trump.
“Unilever has repeatedly threatened Ben & Jerry’s personnel, together with CEO David Stever, ought to they fail to adjust to Unilever’s efforts to silence the social mission,” the submitting with the US District Courtroom for the Southern District of New York stated.
Ben & Jerry’s has lengthy been recognized for taking a public stance on social points because it was based in 1978 by Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield.
It has typically backed campaigns on points like LGBTQ+ rights and local weather change.
The ice cream maker was purchased by Unilever in 2000 by way of a merger settlement that created an impartial board tasked with defending the ice cream model’s values and mission.
However Unilever and Ben & Jerry’s have been at loggerheads for some time. Their relationship soured in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s announced it was halting sales in the West Bank.
The dispute escalated over the past 12 months as Ben & Jerry’s advocated for a ceasefire in Gaza.
In November, the ice cream firm filed a lawsuit saying Unilever had tried to cease it from expressing assist for Palestinian refugees.
Final month, in one other courtroom submitting, Ben & Jerry’s stated Unilever had tried to ban it from publicly criticising Donald Trump.
Mr Stever has been with Ben & Jerry’s since becoming a member of the agency in 1988 as a tour information. He was appointed chief government in 2023.
Ben and Jerry’s courtroom submitting stated the choice to oust Mr Stever was made with none session, as required within the merger settlement between the 2 corporations.
“Unilever…tried to pressure the impartial board into rubberstamping the choice,” it added.
