Philadelphia, December 5 – In a recent legal battle, pharmaceutical giant Bayer has been directed by a Philadelphia jury to pay nearly $3.5 million. The verdict stems from allegations that the company’s Roundup weedkiller was responsible for causing a woman’s cancer. This marks the fifth consecutive legal setback for Bayer as it grapples with a slew of lawsuits claiming similar damages.
Unlike previous cases where the financial toll on Bayer exceeded $2 billion, this verdict is relatively modest. The German conglomerate is under pressure from investors urging a swift resolution to avoid further substantial financial blows from court decisions.
Following a three-week trial and two days of jury deliberations, the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas ruled in favor of the plaintiff, awarding $462,500 in compensatory damages and an additional $3 million in punitive damages. The split 10-2 jury decision reflects the ongoing controversy surrounding the case.
Bayer promptly expressed disagreement with the verdict, stating, “We disagree with the jury’s divided verdict and the modest damages award that conflicts with the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence and worldwide regulatory and scientific assessments, and believe that we have strong arguments on appeal to get this verdict overturned.”
Kelly Martel, the Pennsylvania resident who brought the lawsuit, did not provide immediate comments through her legal representation.
In recent months, Bayer faced more substantial financial setbacks, including a $1.56 billion award in November for three plaintiffs. The company asserts that procedural errors marred these trials and pledges to appeal, with potential reductions in punitive damages based on U.S. Supreme Court guidelines.
Plaintiffs attribute their recent victories to growing scientific support, while Bayer attributes its losses to judges allowing what it deems as misleading testimony. However, the current relatively smaller verdict may not significantly impact investor sentiments regarding Bayer’s legal strategy in the Roundup cases.
Martel, like many other plaintiffs, alleged developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma from Roundup exposure. Bayer countered during the trial, arguing that Martel’s cancer was more likely linked to smoking than Roundup use.
Bayer has consistently maintained that numerous studies and global regulatory bodies affirm the safety of Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, for human use. Despite the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s conclusion that glyphosate likely does not pose a threat to human health, a federal appeals court mandated a review of that decision last year.
While Bayer pledged to be selective in settling Roundup cases and assured investors of sufficient reserves in late November, the company has set aside approximately $6.5 billion to address the litigation. Since acquiring Monsanto in 2018, Bayer has faced around 165,000 claims for personal injuries allegedly caused by Roundup. In 2020, the company settled most pending cases for up to $9.6 billion but failed to secure a settlement for future claims, leaving over 50,000 cases pending.
As Bayer navigates these legal challenges, the repercussions of the latest verdict on its legal strategy remain uncertain.
