Court rules against Ben & Jerry’s, ice cream will be sold in all of Israel
A New York court ruled against Ben & Jerry’s and rejected the company’s attempt to prevent the parent company, Unilever, from selling its ice cream in Judea and Samaria, seemingly the final phase in the company’s attempt to boycott Israel.
Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream Shop. Credit: Joshua Small-Photographer/Shutterstock
Unilever announced in June that it has reached a new business arrangement for Ben & Jerry’s in Israel and has sold its Ben & Jerry’s business interests in Israel to Avi Zinger, the owner of American Quality Products Ltd and the current Israel-based licensee. The new arrangement means Ben & Jerry’s will be sold under its Hebrew and Arabic names throughout Israel, including Judea and Samaria, under the full ownership of its current licensee.
Ben & Jerry’s attempted to block the new arrangement in court, but US district court judge Andrew Carter Jr in Manhattan ruled on Monday that there is no justification for a restraining order to stop sales since Ben & Jerry’s did not present “irreparable harm” or damage to the company’s customers.
This appears to be the final phase in a saga that began in July of 2021 when the ice cream company announced that it would not extend licensing for its product to the Israeli company that holds the franchise in Israel. The decision came after the Israeli company refused Ben & Jerry’s demand that it end any sales of its products in any Israeli towns in Judea and Samaria and even in parts of Jerusalem.
The attempt to boycott Israel was pushed forward by its activist board Chairwoman, Anuradha Mittal, who has a track record of endorsing the BDS movement and defending Hezbollah and Hamas terrorist groups.
Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Jewish communities waged a struggle against Unilever Global and were successful in triggering the anti-boycott laws against Unilever, which led to the withdrawal of investments, holdings and pension funds, including from the state of New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Texas, Colorado, and Arizona.
The pressure and financial losses are believed to have led to this final resolution.
