Business Day

Tiger Brands rejects liability

Consumer goods group accused of failing to prevent outbreak digs in for court battle

- Siseko Njobeni and Nick Hedley

Tiger Brands says it plans to vigorously defend a class-action lawsuit relating to the deadly listeriosi­s outbreak of 2018. The company’s decision is consistent with its assertion throughout the controvers­y that its liability had not been establishe­d. That was despite its support of the class-action notice process to ensure that anyone with a legitimate claim could be informed of the class action. This included setting aside R1m to help the process.

Tiger Brands says it plans to vigorously defend a class-action lawsuit relating to the deadly listeriosi­s outbreak of 2018.

The company’s decision is consistent with its assertion throughout the controvers­y that its liability had not been establishe­d. That was despite its support of the class-action notice process to ensure that anyone with a legitimate claim could be informed of the class action.

This included setting aside R1m to help the class-action process. In a December 3, 2018 statement, the company said the money was a gesture of goodwill “and without any admission of liability”.

The producer of Enterprise polony, Jungle Oats and Oros did not oppose the certificat­ion order, which gave claimants the green light to sue the company.

The consumer goods group said on Wednesday it had received summons this week. The case was given the green light by the high court in Johannesbu­rg on December 3, 2018.

“The company intends to defend the class action and is preparing to follow due legal process,” it said.

Ron Klipin of Cratos Wealth said Tiger Brands’ decision to challenge its liability on the matter was unexpected. “It is a complete surprise. Perhaps the number of claimants has increased significan­tly. But Tiger Brands is definitely a company with deep pockets.”

Tiger Brands, whose shares plummeted in March 2018 after it was named the culprit in the outbreak, said no specific amount of damages was being claimed at this point. The quantum of damages would only be dealt with if the company is found liable. The claims for damages were being made under the Consumer Protection Act, claims in delict, and claims for constituti­onal damages.

This was “notwithsta­nding that the law in SA does not, we are advised, currently recognise a claim for exemplary or punitive damages, or constituti­onal damages of an exemplary or punitive nature”.

While Tiger Brands has product liability insurance cover, its product liability policy does not include cover for exemplary or punitive damages, it said.

“In addition, should an award be made for constituti­onal damages, the product liability policy will not cover that portion of the award which relates to exemplary or punitive damages which are not compensato­ry in nature. The company reserves its rights in this regard.”

In the summons, dated April 15, the claimants were grouped into four classes: individual­s who contracted listeriosi­s but did not die; babies who contracted listeriosi­s while in the womb but did not die; individual­s dependent on a person who died as a result of contractin­g listeriosi­s; and individual­s maintainin­g a person who contracted listeriosi­s.

The claimants are suing Tiger Brands for permanent or temporary pain and suffering, disability, disfigurem­ent, medical expenses, loss of income, psychologi­cal trauma and emotional shock. The epidemic was claimed 218 making it the biggest outbreak of the listeriosi­s in history. A number of pregnant women suffered miscarriag­es or stillbirth­s during the outbreak. The summons said during that period, 443 children 28 days of age or younger contracted listeriosi­s and 93 died as a result. “Of the (children) who survived, a number of them have been left permanentl­y disabled and disfigured,” the summons said. Sixty-nine children between one month and 14 years contracted the diseases and nine died.

Catherine Marcus of law firm Richard Spoor, which is acting on behalf of the claimants, said 500 individual­s were part of the class action. More individual­s could join the lawsuit “because the National Institute for Communicab­le Diseases has more than 1,000 people on their database”.

The claimants have alleged that Tiger Brands was negligent by not ensuring that its Polokwane facility was not contaminat­ed with listeriosi­s.

Tiger Brands shares were down 0.98% to R265.62 on Wednesday.

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? Graphic: RUBY-GAY MARTIN Source: BLOOMBERG
Graphic: RUBY-GAY MARTIN Source: BLOOMBERG

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa