Magnum accuses former Ben & Jerry’s board chair of ‘serious misconduct’ as more directors squeezed out

By Alexander Marrow and Jessica DiNapoli

LONDON/NEW YORK, Jan 22 (Reuters) – Ben & Jerry’s years‑long struggle to defend its progressive social mission from parent‑company pressure escalated this week, as The Magnum Ice Cream Company accused the brand’s former board chair of misconduct and said its once eight‑member board had been reduced to just two directors.

Magnum is Ben & Jerry’s new parent after Unilever , which acquired the socially conscious Ben & Jerry’s in 2000, spun off its ice cream unit into Magnum in December and retains a 19.9% stake.

Since 2024, Vermont-based Ben & Jerry’s and its independent board have fought Unilever, and now Magnum, in a U.S. District Court in New York over what they said were efforts to undermine the brand’s social mission and the board’s autonomy.

In a filing dated January 20 in that U.S. District Court case in New York, Magnum said that Ben & Jerry’s CEO and a Unilever appointee were now the only members on Ben & Jerry’s board.

Ben & Jerry’s Board Chair Anuradha Mittal was ousted in mid-December after Magnum deemed her unfit to serve, and two long-serving directors left as Magnum introduced nine-year term limits.

In the filing, Magnum said Mittal “had engaged in serious misconduct that rendered her ineligible to serve on the board” and that an Ernst & Young audit of the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, a separate U.S. non-profit funded by the brand, led to concerns of conflicts of interest.

Magnum said none of the three remaining independent directors had agreed to certify compliance with Magnum’s code of business integrity and undergo compliance training, meaning they had left the board as of January 1. 

Mittal has accused Magnum and Unilever of trying to discredit her and undermine the board’s authority. 

“Magnum’s midnight purge of independent directors who provide oversight authority and holding hostage charitable funds— all while they continue to conceal the audit report and scope of work — speak for themselves,” Mittal said in a statement on Thursday.

Magnum shared key findings with the foundation in September, it said in the filing.

Magnum described the protracted litigation as “regrettable” and said it remained committed to supporting the Ben & Jerry’s team. 

“We look forward to the development of a refreshed Board with a majority of Independent Directors, led by an Independent Director,” Magnum said in a statement. 

Magnum said the foundation had regularly made grants to organisations where trustees including Mittal held senior positions and received compensation or other benefits. 

The foundation said it had “become collateral damage” in the battle.

The relationship between Ben & Jerry’s and its parent company began unravelling in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s said it would stop selling in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

(Reporting by Alexander Marrow in London and Jessica DiNapoli in New York; Editing by Cynthia Osterman and Susan Fenton)