Samsung Shares Drop as Labor Union Confirms Planned Strike 
Alphabet Raises Record $3.6 Billion in Yen Bonds to Support AI Expansion 
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang to Join Trump’s China Visit Amid AI Chip Tensions 
Argentina Court Upholds Cristina Kirchner Asset Seizure in Corruption Case 
Judge Orders Release of Family After Longest ICE Detention Under Trump Administration 
Nvidia’s China AI Chip Sales Remain Frozen Despite U.S. Approval 
Honda Annual Loss Deepens as U.S. Tariffs and EV Costs Weigh on Earnings 
Kuaishou Stock Jumps on Kling AI IPO Plans and $20 Billion Valuation 
Coles “Down Down” Ruling Sparks Fresh Scrutiny of Australian Supermarket Pricing 
DOJ May Drop Gautam Adani Fraud Charges Amid $10 Billion U.S. Investment Plan 
SoftBank Shares Slide Despite Record Q4 Profit Fueled by OpenAI Investment 
Supreme Court Asked to Reinstate Mail-Order Access to Abortion Pill Mifepristone 
Applied Materials Forecasts Strong Q3 Revenue as AI Chip Demand Accelerates 
Trump-Xi Summit Sparks Renewed Hope for Americans Detained in China 
Judge Rules DOGE Humanities Grant Cuts Unconstitutional 
Federal Appeals Court Allows Texas SB4 Immigration Law Enforcement to Proceed 
Judge Dismisses Elon Musk’s Fraud Claims Against OpenAI, Trial to Proceed on Remaining Allegations 
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.
