By Dietrich Knauth
NEW YORK, Sept 11 (Reuters) – Bayer’s Monsanto unit heads to a Missouri state court on Monday seeking approval of a $7.25 billion settlement that could resolve tens of thousands of U.S. lawsuits alleging that its popular weedkiller Roundup causes cancer.
In a pivotal test of the company’s efforts to put years of litigation behind it, Judge Timothy Boyer will examine the settlement and weigh objections to the deal from some plaintiffs’ attorneys who argue their clients should not be pushed into Bayer’s proposed framework. Boyer will also hear from lawyers who say the settlement is the best way for their clients to receive compensation for injuries caused by Roundup.
The settlement requires the court’s approval, but Boyer is not expected to issue an immediate ruling at the hearing in St. Louis.
The litigation has been a major overhang on Bayer since its 2018 acquisition of Monsanto, costing the company billions of dollars and weighing on its share price. Investors have closely watched Chief Executive Bill Anderson’s efforts to resolve the claims as a key test of his broader turnaround plan, after a previous settlement in 2020 worth approximately $10 billion resolved many existing Roundup lawsuits but left Bayer exposed to future claims.
ANOTHER PUSH FOR A BROAD SETTLEMENT
Bayer is facing approximately 65,000 claims in U.S. state and federal courts from plaintiffs who say they developed cancer after using Roundup at home or on the job. The settlement, announced in February, aims to resolve nearly all current and future Roundup claims in the U.S.
Bayer has denied the claims in the lawsuits and said that decades of studies have shown Roundup’s key ingredient, glyphosate, is safe and does not cause cancer.
The proposed settlement offers payouts ranging from $10,000 to $165,000 to people who were exposed to Roundup and developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a rare form of cancer. The exact award will depend on factors such as the severity of the person’s cancer, how old they were when they were diagnosed, and whether they were exposed to Roundup at home or at work.
Proponents of the settlement say the deal ensures that people with cancer will get paid, at a time when litigation is more uncertain than ever after a recent Supreme Court ruling in Monsanto’s favor. Opponents say the deal doesn’t offer enough money, and they argue that the settlement is designed to trap current and future claimants who would prefer to pursue their lawsuits in court.
“Monsanto continues to believe the class settlement, which is supported by plaintiffs’ counsel representing tens of thousands of potential class members, is fair to all parties and warrants final approval,” a company spokesman said.
THE DEBATE OVER GLYPHOSATE
The litigation gained momentum when the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer determined in 2015 that glyphosate was a probable carcinogen. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, however, found in 2017 that glyphosate was not likely to cause cancer in humans under expected real-world exposures.
The EPA does not require a warning of cancer risk on Roundup’s label, and the agency has said it is working on an updated human health risk assessment for glyphosate that is expected to be finished in late 2026.
While the settlement was pending, Bayer won a Supreme Court ruling over the adequacy of Roundup’s warning label, undercutting one of the central legal claims in the Roundup cases.
(Reporting by Dietrich Knauth, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Lincoln Feast.)
Comments