MARKETS See all articles

LATEST JOBS

Van de Kamp's frozen battered fish. Photo: Pinnacle Foods

Judge rules against ConAgra in deceptive packaging case

Plaintiffs filed a class action suit last year, alleging that ConAgra’s packaging is 'fraudulent' and 'misleading.'

26 March 2024 15:26 GMT UPDATED 26 March 2024 20:36 GMT

By John Fiorillo

A class action lawsuit against ConAgra over its seafood labeling is set to proceed after a US judge ruled on Monday against the consumer goods conglomerate’s argument that the
language used on its packaging was sufficiently vague to avoid further scrutiny.

Plaintiffs filed the suit against ConAgra in an Illinois district court last year, alleging that the company’s packaging – which features the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) eco-label
and the phrase "Good for the Environment" – was fraudulent, misleading, and deceptive.

The original complaint centers on frozen Russian pollock products, harvested in the Bering Sea and marketed by ConAgra under its Mrs. Paul's and Van de Kamp's frozen seafood
brands.

Plaintiffs John Bohen, a California resident, and Abdallah Nasser, a Virginia resident, alleged the MSC-certified fisheries from which the fish were harvested use “harmful fishing
techniques that injure marine wildlife and the marine ecosystem.”

They also allege that ConAgra “lacks the traceability and supply chain transparency required to make such sustainability claims.”

The MSC did not immediately respond to a request by IntraFish for comment. ConAgra told IntraFish it does not comment on pending litigation.

Challenges to sustainability claims on seafood and other products have risen sharply in recent years, forcing companies to reconsider their use of such
claims.

The MSC is also at the center of a controversy over its certifications for processors in China alleged to have used forced labor for seafood products.
Buyers in the United States and the European Union are similarly under fire for being unaware of the issue and relying on the MSC for guidance.
Seafood certification
The plaintiffs in the ConAgra case said they relied on messages on the packaging when they purchased the products between 2020 and 2022.
groups probing alleged
According to court documents, they "believed that the fish was sourced in a way that 'would not harm the marine ecosystem and promote marine
violations at Indian
shrimp farms health.'
Read more
"Absent ConAgra’s alleged misrepresentations, plaintiffs would not have paid the price premium for the products or would not have purchased them at
all.”
On Monday, US District Judge Virginia Kendall rejected ConAgra's argument that the phrase “Good for the Environment” on packaging was "puffery" – an exaggeration or
overstatement expressed in broad, vague, and commendatory language.

"ConAgra’s puffery argument may have stronger footing if 'Good for the Environment' is the only label on the packaging," the judge said. "But in evaluating the whole packaging,
ConAgra insinuates that their products are tied to some environmental benefits or at the least, minimize the harmful impact to the environment."

The packaging in question featured the MSC eco-label and reaffirmed the certification that the fish is “Certifiably Sustainably Sourced.”

"When reasonable consumers see that messaging and then read that the product is ‘Good for the Environment,’ they can infer that the fish is sourced in a manner that is not harmful
to the environment," the judge said.

Deceptive marketing complaints

The case is one of several claims against seafood companies and retailers in recent years.

In December, a California federal judge refused to dismiss a class action lawsuit against Red Lobster, alleging the restaurant chain uses deceptive marketing to promote its Maine
lobster and shrimp products as “sustainable."

Red Lobster, America's largest seafood restaurant chain, is owned by Thailand-based seafood conglomerate Thai Union and operates more than 650 outlets in the United States. The
chain's annual sales exceed $2.3 billion (€2.1 billion).

Judge John Kronstadt's December ruling found that Red Lobster's sustainability representations cannot be deemed mere puffery, as lawyers for the company have said. The plaintiffs
in this case, a group of California consumers, argue Red Lobster sources shrimp and lobster from unsustainable sources but states the opposite in its marketing materials.

In the past three years, consumers have brought similar deceptive marketing complaints against Gorton's, Cooke, Aldi and Mowi.

Gorton's settled for an undisclosed amount, while Mowi was forced to pay a $1.3 million (€1.2 million) settlement and remove the terms “sustainable” and “eco-friendly” from some of
its products sold in the United States. (Copyright)

Make better business decisions with a group subscription to IntraFish

Empower your team with industry-leading insight and analysis of the fast-moving seafood sector.
Learn how a group subscription to IntraFish can empower your business.

Find out more

Whitefish ConAgra Gorton's Marine Stewardship Council Mowi Frozen fish US District Court

SPONSORED CONTENT | ALLTECH

VIDEO | EcoVadis winner Alltech on the

campaign that clinched the gold medal

Land-based salmon farmer backed by Patagonia

Peter Pan reaches deal to sell Valdez plant, founder headed into receivership
strikes agreement to lease out three other
facilities