トップページ


August 9, 2019 

Monsanto parent Bayer said to propose $8 billion settlement over Roundup claims

Bayer, which bought Roundup maker Monsanto last year, has reportedly offered $8 billion to settle thousands cancer claims.
Lawyers for the consumers who claim glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, caused their cancer, want $10 billion, according to Bloomberg.
However, mediator Ken Feinberg told Reuters that the reported offer is "pure fiction."
Bayer's stock price has fallen by half since its June 6, 2018, purchase of Monsanto.

Monsanto parent company Bayer is said to be offering an $8 billion deal to settle about 18,000 claims that its weedkiller Roundup causes cancer. Shares of Bayer jumped ahead of the start of trade Friday on optimism that a settlement would end uncertainty about the chemical giant's liabilities.

The offer is less than the $10 billion requested by lawyers representing consumers who claim their cancers were caused by glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, according to Bloomberg News, which cited people familiar with the negotiations. It could take months to reach a deal, and there's no assurance the sides will come to an agreement, the publication added.

However, a report in Reuters refuted the settlement offer, with mediator Ken Feinberg saying Bayer has not offered to pay billions of dollars to settle the claims.

"Bayer has not proposed paying $8 billion to settle all the U.S. Roundup cancer claims. Such a statement is pure fiction," Feinberg told Reuters Friday. "Compensation has not even been discussed in the global mediation discussions."

Bayer didn't return a request for comment. Still, the prospect of a settlement cheered investors, sending Bayer shares up 4.7% on Friday.

"$8 billion would be lower than most analysts are forecasting and many investors fearing," Markus Mayer, an analyst at Baader Helvea, told Bloomberg.

Glyphosate is facing an unprecedented tests both in the courtroom and in America's homes amid rising concern about the safety of the chemical. Tests from environmental groups are adding to consumer worries, such as a recent study finding that 21 oat-based cereal and snack products, including Cheerios, contain traces of glyphosate.

Since Bayer bought Roundup's maker Monsanto last year, the German chemical giant has lost three high-profile court cases over the chemical's possible link to cancer.

Investors have fled Bayer over concerns about its potential liabilities, halving the company's stock price since its June 6, 2018, purchase of Monsanto. In its most recent annual report, Bayer said it expects more lawsuits to emerge.

June 24, 2020  

Bayer announces agreements to resolve major legacy Monsanto litigation

Company will make a total payment of $10.1 billion to $10.9 billion (EUR 9.1 billion to EUR 9.8 billion) to resolve current and address potential future Roundup™ litigation /
Company also resolves dicamba drift litigation for payment of up to $400 million and most PCB water litigation exposure for payment of approximately $820 million /
Funding sourced from free cash flow and Animal Health divestment /
Bayer is well positioned to deliver science-based solutions to meet global health, nutrition needs

Bayer announced today a series of agreements that will substantially resolve major outstanding Monsanto litigation, including U.S. Roundup™ product liability litigation, dicamba drift litigation and PCB water litigation.

2019/12/26　米EPAと司法省、除草剤Roundupの発癌被害裁判でBayer側支持の意見書

ミズーリ州最大の桃の栽培業者のBader Farmsが訴えていたもので、近在の農家が散布した除草剤ジカンバ（Dicamba)　の影響で桃が枯れ、2000年代初めに平均して162千ブッシェルあった収穫が2018年には12千ブッシェルまで減り、廃業に追い込まれたとして、20.9百万ドルの損害賠償を求めて訴えていた。

2020/2/26　BayerとBASFによる除草剤被害で米裁判所が損害賠償命令　

The main feature is the U.S. Roundup™ resolution that will bring closure to approximately 75% of the current Roundup™ litigation involving approximately 125,000 filed and unfiled claims overall. The resolved claims include all plaintiff law firms leading the Roundup™ federal multi-district litigation (MDL) or the California bellwether cases, and those representing approximately 95% of the cases currently set for trial, and establish key values and parameters to guide the resolution of the remainder of the claims as negotiations advance. The resolution also puts in place a mechanism to resolve potential future claims efficiently. The company will make a payment of $8.8 billion to $9.6 billion to resolve the current Roundup™ litigation, including an allowance expected to cover unresolved claims, and $1.25 billion to support a separate class agreement to address potential future litigation. The Roundup™ class agreement will be subject to approval by Judge Vince Chhabria of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The resolutions were approved unanimously by Bayer’s Board of Management and Supervisory Board with input from its Special Litigation Committee. The agreements contain no admission of liability or wrongdoing.

“First and foremost, the Roundup™ settlement is the right action at the right time for Bayer to bring a long period of uncertainty to an end,” said Werner Baumann, Chief Executive Officer of Bayer. “It resolves most current claims and puts in place a clear mechanism to manage risks of potential future litigation. It is financially reasonable when viewed against the significant financial risks of continued, multi-year litigation and the related impacts to our reputation and to our business. The decision to resolve the Roundup™ litigation enables us to focus fully on the critical supply of healthcare and food. It will also return the conversation about the safety and utility of glyphosate-based herbicides to the scientific and regulatory arena and to the full body of science.”

“The Roundup™ agreements are designed as a constructive and reasonable resolution to a unique litigation,” said Kenneth R. Feinberg, court-appointed mediator for the settlement talks. “The separate, independent settlements of the current claims are unique and a tribute to Bayer. The significant progress made to date – which exceeds the initial participation rates of other claims resolution proceedings – provides a robust framework that will enable the parties to bring closure to the current Roundup™ litigation in due course.”

Resolution of Roundup™ litigation

The multi-step Roundup™ resolution includes several elements. The agreements will resolve the vast majority of the current litigation in U.S. federal and state courts, including both plaintiffs with filed cases and parties who have retained counsel but not yet filed their claims in court. Those participating in the settlement will be required to dismiss their cases or agree not to file. The range of $8.8 billion to $9.6 billion covers both the agreements already signed and those that are still under negotiation. It also reflects the fact that the number of claimants who are eligible to receive compensation under these agreements won’t be known until the claims process is well underway. The claims still subject to negotiation largely consist of cases generated by TV advertising and for which plaintiffs’ law firms have provided little or no information on the medical condition of their clients, and/or cases held by law firms with small inventories.

The three cases that have gone to trial – Johnson, Hardeman and Pilliod – will continue through the appeals process and are not covered by the settlement. It is important for the company to continue these cases as the appeals will provide legal guidance going forward. In an appellate court filing, the U.S. government expressed its specific support for the company’s preemption arguments, asserting that state law warning claims in the Roundup™ litigation conflict with U.S. federal law, requiring no cancer warning, and must be dismissed. Just this week, a federal judge in California found that the weight of scientific evidence does not support the state’s Proposition 65 cancer warning requirement for glyphosate-based herbicides -- a ruling that reinforces the very arguments the company has made at trial.

Potential future cases will be governed by a class agreement which is subject to court approval. The agreement includes the establishment of a class of potential future plaintiffs and the creation of an independent Class Science Panel. The Class Science Panel will determine whether Roundup™ can cause non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), and if so, at what minimum exposure levels. The materials considered by the Class Science Panel that Bayer has permission to disclose or are in the public domain will be posted on a public website. Both the class and company will be bound by the Class Science Panel’s determination on this question of general causation, taking this decision out of the jury trial setting and putting it back in the hands of expert scientists. If the Class Science Panel determines that a causal connection between Roundup™ and NHL is not established, class members will be barred from claiming otherwise in any future litigation against the company. The Class Science Panel’s determination is expected to take several years. Class members will not be permitted to proceed with Roundup™ claims prior to the Class Science Panel’s determination, and cannot seek punitive damages. The agreed funding is capped at $1.25 billion and will support research into treatment of NHL, NHL diagnostic programs in underserved areas, and assistance payments to class members who develop NHL before the Class Science Panel’s determination and are eligible on a need basis for assistance during that period.

The company said that before deciding to settle, it considered the alternative course of continuing to litigate Roundup™ cases. In the company’s risk assessment, potential negative outcomes of further litigation, including more advertising and growing numbers of plaintiffs, upwards of twenty trials per year and uncertain jury outcomes, and associated reputational and business impacts, likely would substantially exceed the settlement and related costs.

“Taking account of various options, I am convinced this plan provides a comprehensive, reasonable solution to the complex, contested issues presented by this litigation,” said attorney John Beisner, a consultant to Bayer’s Supervisory Board and a mass tort expert who leads Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP’s Mass Torts, Insurance and Consumer Litigation Practice Group.

“Supported by our external advisor John Beisner and the Litigation Committee, the Supervisory Board has closely followed the Roundup™ litigation, as well as the dicamba and PCB litigation, and has provided counsel to the Board of Management on these matters. The Supervisory Board unanimously agrees with our Board of Management that all three settlements are in the best interest of the company and our stakeholders,” said Norbert Winkeljohann, Chairman of Bayer’s Supervisory Board.

Baumann added: “Our company is grounded in the well-being of our customers. As a science-based company committed to improving people’s health, we have great sympathy for anyone who suffers from disease, and we understand their search for answers. At the same time, the extensive body of science indicates that Roundup™ does not cause cancer, and therefore, is not responsible for the illnesses alleged in this litigation. We stand strongly behind our glyphosate-based herbicides, which are among the most rigorously studied products of their kind, and four decades of science support their safety and that they are not carcinogenic.” Indeed, in its Interim Registration Review Decision, issued in January, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accurately concluded that it “did not identify any human health risks from exposure to glyphosate.”

Customers, including farmers and other professional users who depend on glyphosate-based herbicides for their livelihoods, will see no change in the availability of Roundup™ products under the Roundup™ agreements announced today. Meanwhile, Bayer remains committed to offering customers more choices and announced last year an investment of approximately EUR 5 billion over a ten-year period to develop additional methods to manage weeds as part of an integrated approach to sustainable agriculture.

Resolution of dicamba litigation

Bayer also announced a mass tort agreement to settle the previously disclosed dicamba drift litigation involving alleged damage to crops. The company will pay up to a total of $400 million to resolve the multi-district litigation pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri and claims for the 2015-2020 crop years. Claimants will be required to provide proof of damage to crop yields and evidence that it was due to dicamba in order to collect. The company expects a contribution from its co-defendant, BASF, towards this settlement.

The only dicamba drift case to go to trial – Bader Farms – is not included in this resolution. The company believes the verdict in Bader Farms is inconsistent with the evidence and the law and will continue to pursue post-trial motions and an appeal, if necessary.

Bayer stands strongly behind the safety and utility of its XtendiMax™ herbicide with VaporGrip™ technology and continues to enhance training and education efforts to help ensure growers use these products successfully. The company is settling the pending dicamba drift cases to be able to focus on the needs of its customers.

Resolution of PCB litigation

Bayer also announced a series of agreements that resolve cases representing most of the company’s exposure to PCB water litigation. Monsanto legally manufactured PCBs until ceasing their production in 1977. One agreement establishes a class that includes all local governments with EPA permits involving water discharges impaired by PCBs. Bayer will pay a total of approximately $650 million to the class, which will be subject to court approval.

2003年8月には、旧Monsantoがアラバマ州で健康への危険を隠蔽しながら河川にPCBを投棄したとの住民訴訟に対し和解が行われ、Solutia、Monsanto、Pharmacia の3社が不正行為を認めないまま総額６億ドルの賠償を行なうこととなり、Solutia はそのうち５千万ドルを負担した。

At the same time, the company has entered into separate agreements with the Attorneys-General of New Mexico, Washington, and the District of Columbia to resolve similar PCB claims. For these agreements, which are separate from the class, Bayer will make payments that together total approximately $170 million.

Funding sourced from free cash flow and Animal Health divestment

Cash payments related to the settlements are expected to start in 2020. Bayer currently assumes that the potential cash outflow will not exceed $5 billion in 2020 and $5 billion in 2021; the remaining balance would be paid in 2022 or thereafter. In order to finance these payments which are subject to tax treatment, Bayer can make use of existing surplus liquidity, future free cash flows, the proceeds from the Animal Health divestment, and additional bond issuances, which will provide flexibility in managing the settlement payments as well as upcoming debt maturities.

Based on publications by the rating agencies and the company’s communication with them, Bayer expects to keep investment grade credit ratings. With its strong underlying business, the company intends to keep its dividend policy. At the same time, deleveraging the balance sheet remains a high priority.

Bayer: Well positioned for the future

“As we work to put this major litigation behind us, Bayer can set a course for the future and tackle the global challenges we face in both health and nutrition – not only today as we confront the COVID-19 pandemic, but also long-term, as we work to improve quality of life for a growing and aging population of an estimated 10 billion people by 2050,” said Baumann. “More than 100,000 people put their energies into making our vision of ‘Health for all, Hunger for none’ come true with medicines and agricultural products. We believe that science and innovation will be critical to the future, just as they have been for Bayer in serving customers and patients over nearly 160 years. We are committed to addressing these challenges in a responsible manner, both to help meet the UN’s sustainable development goals, and maintain the transparency and constructive engagement with stakeholders that is essential to sustain public trust in our products and in our company.”

　

11/30/2020　

U.S. judge rejects $648 million Bayer PCB contamination settlement

A federal judge has rejected Bayer AG's proposed $648 million settlement of class-action litigation by cities and other claimants over contamination from polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, made by the former Monsanto Co.

In a Nov. 25 decision, U.S. District Judge Fernando Olguin in Los Angeles said the accord appeared "overly broad" because it could shield Bayer from future claims, and require the settling plaintiffs to indemnify Bayer against those claims.

Olguin also said most of the 2,528 class members stood to receive "very modest" payments of just $15,000 to $30,000, making the indemnification provision "troubling."

Bayer, which bought Monsanto for $63 billion in 2018, said in a statement it would work with the plaintiffs to address Olguin's concerns, and was confident it would reach a revised preliminary settlement by the Dec. 31 deadline he set.

Los Angeles County and the cities of San Diego, Baltimore and Portland, Oregon are among the plaintiffs, which came from 36 U.S. states. The payout was to include $550 million for class members and up to $98 million for legal fees and expenses.

The German company announced the settlement in June, when it also proposed paying roughly $12 billion to resolve litigation tied to Monsanto.

Most of that was to resolve claims that Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller caused cancer. Bayer has said Roundup is safe for human use.

PCBs were once used widely to insulate electrical equipment, and also used in such products as carbonless copy paper, caulking, floor finish and paint. They were outlawed by the U.S. government in 1979 after being linked to cancer and other health problems. Monsanto produced PCBs from 1935 to 1977.

The case is City of Long Beach et al v. Monsanto Co, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, No. 16-03493. (Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Edwina Gibbs)

　

MNA

Bayer working to replace controversial chemical in weed killer

Bayer is hoping to introduce a substitute for glyphosate — the active ingredient in controversial weed killer Roundup — within four years, Bill Anderson, chief executive of the German chemical company said.  

“We are testing this new substance on real plants. It’s the first revolutionary innovation in this area in 30 years. Our objective is to have it on the market in 2028,” he told German Sunday newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung. 

Bayer has faced numerous court cases in the United States linked to the suspected cancerous effects of Roundup produced by Monsanto, a US company Bayer acquired in 2018 for $60 billion.  

At the end of January, 54,000 claims were still outstanding out of 167,000 initially registered.

Bayer has been fined billions of dollars, with most cases still under appeal. Anderson told the newspaper his group wants to speed up the settlements.   

“We will improve our defence strategy and see what can be done outside the courts to limit our legal risks,” he said, declining to provide further details.   

August 16, 2024

Bayer wins victory in US legal battle against Roundup cancer claims

Bayer, opens new tab won a legal victory in its fight to limit liability from claims that its Roundup weed killer causes cancer, as a U.S. appeals court on Thursday said federal law shields the German company from a lawsuit by a Pennsylvania landscaper.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia rejected plaintiff David Schaffner's claim that Bayer's Monsanto unit violated state law by failing to put a cancer warning on the label for Roundup.
Schaffner was diagnosed in 2006 with a kind of cancer called non-Hodgkins lymphoma, a common claim for Roundup plaintiffs.
He and his wife Theresa sued Bayer in 2019, in part over how his illness affected their relationship.

Chief Judge Michael Chagares wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act（FIFRA) requires nationwide uniformity in pesticide labels, and prevented Pennsylvania from adding a cancer warning.
Bayer said the decision conflicts with rulings from federal appeals courts in San Francisco and Atlanta in similar cases.
That may increase the prospect that the U.S. Supreme Court could step in to resolve the split, and potentially reduce Bayer's liabilities.
Chip Becker, a lawyer for the Schaffners, said he was disappointed with the decision, and that federal law should not preempt his clients' failure-to-warn claim. He said the Schaffners are reviewing their legal options.
Bayer said it was pleased with the decision, and the Supreme Court should "settle this important issue of law."
It has maintained that Roundup and its active ingredient glyphosate are safe, and said it "continues to stand fully behind" the brand.
Bayer has faced extensive litigation over Roundup, and has seen its share price fall more than 73% since buying Monsanto for $63 billion in June 2018.
The company settled much of the Roundup litigation for $10.9 billion in 2020, but still faces about 58,000 claims , opens new tab. Another 114,000 claims have been settled or deemed ineligible.
Though Bayer won 14 of 23 Roundup trials through July 23, one victory was overturned on appeal, and the losses saddled it with billions of dollars of damages awards.
The Schaffners settled with Bayer in September 2022, conditioned on Bayer being unable to convince courts that federal law preempted Pennsylvania from requiring a cancer warning.
Chagares said it did, and that this approach "best achieves Congress's stated aim of uniformity in pesticide labeling."
Roundup is among the most widely used weed killers in the United States. Bayer phased out sales for home use last year.
The case is Schaffner et al v Monsanto Corp, 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 22-3075.

EPAはRoundupには発がん性なしとし、製品ラベルに発がん性ありと書くのを禁止している。「発がん性危険を書いていない」ことでの訴訟で、判決が分かれている。Bayer敗訴の例

　

Aug 16 2024

Bayer shares soar 11% after key U.S. legal win against Roundup cancer claims

  • Bayer shares jumped in morning trade as the German life sciences company said it scored a legal victory in its suit over claims that exposure to its popular Roundup weed killer led to cancer.
  • The company on Thursday announced that the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia found in its favor against plaintiff David Schaffner’s claim alleging a state law violation incurred by failing to add a cancer warning to the Roundup label.
  • Bayer has been mired in legal conflict over Roundup, with Reuters estimating that 165,000 charges were brought against the product in the U.S., of which roughly 54,000 reportedly remain as of August, following a $10.9 billion settlement in 2020.

　

　Bayer　
　

Jury Finds in Favor of Monsanto in Philadelphia Trial

Today, the jury reached a verdict in the Young Roundup™ product liability trial before Judge Angelo Foglietta in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.

 In response to the decision, Monsanto issued the following statement:

 “The jury’s verdict in favor of the Company marks the 14th favorable outcome in the last 20 trials and validates the Company’s strategy of taking cases to trial based on strong scientific and regulatory evidence. The verdict makes clear that the plaintiff failed to prove that Roundup™ was the cause of the injuries alleged in this case, consistent with the scientific evidence and the consensus of regulatory bodies and their scientific assessments worldwide. While we have great sympathy for anyone who suffers a loss or injury, the science proves that Roundup™ is not carcinogenic.

 “This verdict follows the favorable ruling from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Schaffner v. Monsanto, which unanimously held that the state-based failure-to-warn claims central to these cases are expressly preempted by the federal law, since the U.S. EPA has repeatedly concluded the product does not cause cancer and approved the product label without any such warning. The Company is actively taking steps to apply the Schaffner ruling to other Roundup cases and looks forward to presenting its arguments, as fully embraced by the Third Circuit, at trial courts, appellate courts, and the U.S. Supreme Court.

 “Additionally, outside the courtroom, we will continue supporting legislation at the state and federal level alongside hundreds of agricultural organizations to ensure that any pesticide reviewed and registered by the U.S. EPA – and sold under a label consistent with the EPA’s determinations – is sufficient to satisfy requirements for health and safety warnings. Without legislative certainty, the litigation industry will continue to target crop protection tools that have been deemed safe by experts at the U.S. EPA.

“We continue to stand fully behind the safety of Roundup™ products – critical tools that farmers rely on to produce affordable food and feed the world.”