Bayer lifted by likely new trial in $250 million
weedkiller case
Send a link to a friend
[October 11, 2018]
By Jim Christie and Ludwig Burger
SAN FRANCISCO/FRANKFURT (Reuters) - The
prospect of a fresh trial that could overturn $250 million damages
against Bayer's <BAYGn.DE> Monsanto unit lifted the German company's
shares, after an August ruling that it failed to warn users of the
alleged cancer risks of its weedkillers.
The original verdict wiped 10 percent off the value of the company and
marked the first such decision against Monsanto and its glyphosate-containing
weedkillers Roundup and Ranger Pro.
Bayer, which bought Monsanto this year for $63 billion, faces more than
8,000 similar lawsuits in the United States.
On Wednesday, in San Francisco's Superior Court of California, Judge
Suzanne Bolanos gave a tentative ruling to grant the company's motion
for a new trial.
Such decisions are usually finalised after a second hearing with few
major changes.
The case was brought by groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson and the August 10
verdict included an additional $39 million in compensatory damages.
Johnson, whose doctors say he is likely to die within the next two
years, attended Wednesday's hearing.
Bayer's shares jumped as much as 6.4 percent on Thursday, boosted by the
prospect of the initial jury verdict being overturned or reduced without
Bayer having to go through a more lengthy appeals process. The STOXX
Europe 600 index <.STOXX>, meanwhile, was down 1.7 percent.
"The presiding Judge Bolanos may indeed be inclined to deliver some
better news, with yesterday's hearing indicating a willingness to allow
a new trial altogether on the $250m punitive damages awarded in the
trial," Barclays analysts said in a note.
The litigation has cast a pall over the stock, with Bayer shares still
trading some 16 percent below the level prior to the original verdict.
Judge Bolanos, at the close of the two-hour hearing in front of a packed
courtroom, said the parties had until Friday to make submissions in
response to her ruling.
Bayer reiterated that the original jury verdict was "wholly at odds with
over 40 years of real-world use, an extensive body of scientific data
and analysis, including in-depth reviews by regulatory authorities."
[to top of second column] |
Plaintiff Dewayne Johnson leaves the courtroom following a
post-trial hearing at the Superior Court in San Francisco,
California, U.S., October 10, 2018. REUTERS/Jim Christie
In September 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency concluded a
decades-long assessment of glyphosate risks and found that the chemical was not
a likely carcinogen to humans. However, in 2015 the cancer unit of the World
Health Organisation classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans."
On Wednesday, the judge said that Johnson had failed to meet his burden of
producing clear and convincing evidence of malice or oppression by Monsanto, a
requirement for allowing a jury to award punitive damages.
Michael Miller, a lawyer for Johnson, told the court that the jury had reached a
unanimous verdict after careful deliberations, supported by sufficient science.
"We have a jury that got it right," he added.
Monsanto had asked Bolanos in court filings on Sept. 18 to set aside the entire
verdict or, in the alternative, reduce the award or grant a new trial.
Monsanto's lawyers said a comment made by Johnson's lawyers during the original
trial that company executives would be "popping champagne bottles" if Johnson
loses, were prejudicial and aimed at inciting jurors.
Johnson's case, filed in 2016, was fast-tracked for trial due to the severity of
his non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph system.
($1 = 0.8668 euros)
(Reporting by Jim Christie in San Francisco; Writing and additional reporting by
Tina Bellon in New York; Editing by Bill Berkrot and Elaine Hardcastle)
[© 2018 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2018 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|