Stock Markets January 22, 2026

Internal Conflict at Ben & Jerry's Intensifies as Board Members Exit Amid Misconduct Claims

Magnum Ice Cream Company alleges serious misconduct against former board chair amidst shrinking governance

By Maya Rios UL
Internal Conflict at Ben & Jerry's Intensifies as Board Members Exit Amid Misconduct Claims
UL

Ben & Jerry’s ongoing dispute with its parent company escalated with allegations of serious misconduct against its former board chair Anuradha Mittal by Magnum Ice Cream Company, the newly formed parent entity from Unilever's spinoff. As the board’s size diminished to two members, tensions over governance and the brand’s social mission persist, with legal battles continuing in New York.

Key Points

  • Ben & Jerry’s board governance is in turmoil, shrinking from eight members to just two amid disputes with parent company Magnum and Unilever.
  • Allegations of serious misconduct against former board chair Anuradha Mittal involve potential conflicts of interest tied to the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation and have prompted her removal.
  • The continuing court case in New York centers on the autonomy of Ben & Jerry’s board and efforts by parent companies to influence the brand’s social mission and governance.
  • Sectors affected include consumer goods and corporate governance, with implications for corporate social responsibility and board independence in branded subsidiaries.

Ben & Jerry’s, the socially conscious ice cream brand, is experiencing heightened internal strife as its battle to uphold its progressive mission in the face of pressures from its parent companies reaches a new peak. The Magnum Ice Cream Company, which now oversees Ben & Jerry’s following a recent spinoff from Unilever, has publicly accused Anuradha Mittal, former chair of Ben & Jerry’s independent board, of serious misconduct that has contributed to a significant reduction in the board’s membership.

After Unilever, which acquired Ben & Jerry’s in 2000, separated its ice cream division into Magnum in December, it retained a 19.9% stake in the new entity. Since 2024, Ben & Jerry’s and its autonomous board, based in Vermont, have been engaged in litigation with Unilever and subsequently Magnum in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The core issue in the case is what Ben & Jerry’s describes as efforts by the parent company to undermine the brand’s social mission and restrict the autonomy of its independent board.

In a court filing dated January 20, Magnum detailed that the board of Ben & Jerry’s, which once had eight members, now comprises only two directors: the company’s CEO and a Unilever-appointed member. The filing also disclosed that the board chair, Anuradha Mittal, was removed in mid-December after Magnum declared her unfit to serve. Subsequently, two long-serving independent directors also departed following the instatement of nine-year term limits on board membership by Magnum.

Magnum’s filing further revealed that an investigation into the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation—a separate nonprofit funded by the brand—conducted by Ernst & Young uncovered concerns over conflicts of interest. Allegedly, the foundation had granted funds to organizations where trustees, including Mittal, held senior roles and received compensation or benefits. According to Magnum, this situation contributed to the decision that Mittal’s conduct made her ineligible to continue as a board member.

In addition, Magnum stated that the remaining three independent directors declined to undergo compliance training as required, resulting in their departure from the board effective January 1.

Mittal has denied these allegations, accusing Magnum and Unilever of attempting to discredit her and erode the board’s authority. She condemned the actions as a "midnight purge" and criticized Magnum for withholding the full audit report and details of the investigation into the foundation, which she characterized as "collateral damage" caught in the conflict.

Magnum, describing the prolonged legal dispute as unfortunate, expressed ongoing commitment to supporting the Ben & Jerry’s team. The company conveyed anticipation for reestablishing a refreshed board dominated by independent directors and led by an independent member, signaling an aspiration to restore some governance stability.

The deterioration of relations between Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever, which ultimately led to the creation of Magnum, began in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s announced its decision to cease sales in the Israeli-occupied West Bank—a political position that sparked controversy within the relationship between the brand and its parent company.

Risks

  • Ongoing legal disputes pose uncertainty for Ben & Jerry’s operational governance and strategic direction, potentially impacting brand reputation and stability in the consumer goods sector.
  • Potential conflicts of interest in charitable foundations can erode stakeholder trust and invite regulatory scrutiny, particularly for companies emphasizing social missions.
  • The diminishing independence of the board may affect oversight and decision-making quality, risking dilution of the brand's socially conscious stance and internal governance effectiveness.

More from Stock Markets

Quarantine Enforced at Texas Immigration Center After Two Measles Cases Confirmed Feb 2, 2026 Security Flaw in 'Moltbook' Exposed Private Data of Thousands, Cyber Firm Says Feb 2, 2026 Capgemini to Divest U.S. Government Unit Amid Scrutiny Over ICE Contract Feb 2, 2026 Piper Sandler Favors Select Home Improvement Names as Home Equity Activity Rebounds Feb 2, 2026 Ondas to Buy Rotron Aero, Expanding Long-Range Autonomous Strike Capabilities Feb 2, 2026