Unilever and Magnum Face Defamation Lawsuit Over Ben & Jerry's Board Chair Dismissal

Former Ben & Jerry's independent board chair Anuradha Mittal has filed a federal defamation lawsuit against Unilever and its recently spun-off ice cream division, Magnum, alleging that both companies deliberately damaged her reputation after she publicly advocated for Palestinian rights and a Gaza ceasefire. The complaint, filed in Oakland, California, marks the latest flashpoint in a prolonged corporate conflict over Ben & Jerry's independence and social mission.

Mittal claims that following Unilever's announcement of the Magnum spinoff in March 2024, tensions intensified and the companies began spreading false allegations against her. These included accusations of self-dealing, misuse of funds from the Ben & Jerry's Foundation, creating a hostile workplace, and general misconduct — all of which she categorically denies. She argues these smear campaigns were calculated to humiliate and professionally discredit her, ultimately contributing to her removal as board chair in December. Beyond reputational harm, Mittal says the ordeal caused depression and chronic insomnia.

Both Unilever and Magnum have dismissed the claims as entirely unfounded, expressing confidence that the legal process will vindicate them. Mittal is seeking compensatory and punitive damages, arguing the defendants acted with actual malice — knowingly making false statements or showing reckless disregard for the truth.

The dispute traces back to 2021, when Ben & Jerry's announced it would halt ice cream sales in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, straining its four-decade relationship with Unilever. That tension escalated when Ben & Jerry's filed its own lawsuit against Unilever in November 2024, accusing the company of trying to dismantle its independent board and suppress its progressive activism. The Ben & Jerry's Foundation recently joined that case as a co-plaintiff, and the litigation remains ongoing.

Mittal, founder of the Oakland Institute and a prominent advocate for marginalized communities, says this battle goes beyond corporate governance — it is fundamentally about protecting the right to stand for social justice without corporate retaliation.