Ben & Jerry’s has no energy to sue over Israeli ice cream sale By Reuters

(Refiles to repair typographical error)

By Jessica DiNapoli and Jonathan Stempel

NEW YORK (Reuters) -Unilever plc requested a U.S. choose to dismiss a lawsuit by Ben & Jerry’s over the sale of its Israeli ice cream enterprise, saying the subsidiary’s “insistence on taking sides” within the Israeli-Palestinian battle provides its board no authority to cease and even sue over the sale.

In a submitting on Friday afternoon in Manhattan federal court docket, Unilever (NYSE:) stated Ben & Jerry’s board “is not any abnormal board.”

The board, it stated within the filings, has some duty to protect its “social mission” and safeguard the model underneath the shareholder settlement from 2000, when Unilever purchased Ben & Jerry’s. However Unilever stated that the board can not sue.

Unilever additionally stated the board’s “latest insistence on taking sides within the Israeli-Palestinian battle created an untenable scenario” for each side.

Ben & Jerry’s couldn’t instantly be reached for remark.

The maker of Cherry Garcia and Chubby Hubby ice cream initially sued Unilever in July to dam the sale of its enterprise in Israel and the occupied West Financial institution to native licensee Avi Zinger.

Ben & Jerry’s merchandise have been on sale in Israel for greater than three a long time, however the firm stated final 12 months that West Financial institution gross sales had been inconsistent with its values.

In August, a choose rejected Ben & Jerry’s bid to instantly halt such gross sales.

Final month, Ben & Jerry’s board renounced the sale of its ice cream by Zinger, saying his merchandise “shouldn’t be confused with the merchandise” made by Ben & Jerry’s.

“The sale of merchandise bearing any Ben & Jerry’s insignia within the Occupied Palestinian Territory is towards our values,” the board stated.

In its movement to dismiss the lawsuit, Unilever additionally stated Ben & Jerry’s waited too lengthy to assert that its trademark rights had been “covertly” taken away greater than 20 years in the past, and that accusations underlying the declare had been a matter of public file.