Blackstone Leads $400 Million Funding Round in Cyera at $9 Billion Valuation 
ANZ New CEO Forgoes Bonus After Shareholders Reject Executive Pay Report 
Republicans Raise National Security Concerns Over Intel’s Testing of China-Linked Chipmaking Tools 
Supporters Gather Ahead of Verdict in Jimmy Lai’s Landmark Hong Kong National Security Trial 
TikTok U.S. Deal Advances as ByteDance Signs Binding Joint Venture Agreement 
Special Prosecutor Alleges Yoon Suk Yeol Sought North Korea Provocation to Justify Martial Law 
Nike Shares Slide as Margins Fall Again Amid China Slump and Costly Turnaround 
Apple Explores India for iPhone Chip Assembly as Manufacturing Push Accelerates 
Judge Orders Return of Seized Evidence in Comey-Related Case, DOJ May Seek New Warrant 
Brazil Arrests Former Peruvian Foreign Minister Augusto Blacker Miller in International Fraud Case 
Biren Technology Targets Hong Kong IPO to Raise $300 Million Amid China’s AI Chip Push 
Treasury Wine Estates Shares Plunge on Earnings Warning Amid U.S. and China Weakness 
Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration’s Pause on New Wind-Energy Permits 
California, 18 States Sue to Block Trump’s $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee 
Delta Air Lines President Glen Hauenstein to Retire, Leaving Legacy of Premium Strategy 
DOJ Sues Loudoun County School Board Over Transgender Locker Room Policy 
Unilever (LON:ULVR) has rejected claims it forced out former Ben & Jerry’s CEO Dave Stever over the ice cream brand’s progressive activism. In a recent court filing, Unilever stated it had offered Stever a higher-paying role in its global ice cream division, which is set to spin off, but he chose to resign on March 31. The filing also seeks dismissal of Ben & Jerry’s lawsuit, which alleges Unilever tried to dismantle its board and suppress its activism, including protests against the war in Gaza and criticism of former U.S. President Donald Trump.
Unilever accused Ben & Jerry’s Chair Anuradha Mittal of using the lawsuit to publicly attack the company, claiming the brand’s “staunchly pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli stance” hurt its reputation and investor relations. Ben & Jerry’s lawyer, Shahmeer Halepota, dismissed Unilever’s defense as “revisionism,” accusing the company of retaliation and suppressing dissent.
The lawsuit centers on a 2000 agreement when Unilever acquired the Vermont-based company, allowing Ben & Jerry’s to maintain an independent board to uphold its social mission. Unilever claims Mittal breached confidentiality by publicizing internal employment discussions and making false allegations.
Earlier this week, Unilever confirmed its planned ice cream division spinoff, including brands like Breyers and Magnum, remains on track to operate independently by July 1, with separate financial reporting by the fourth quarter. Despite the legal dispute, Unilever emphasized that Ben & Jerry’s is not for sale.
The case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under No. 24-08641, marks a significant clash between corporate governance and brand activism.
