The litigation between farmers and agricultural giant Syngenta, over the company’s Viptera GMO corn and its rejection by China in 2013, continues to play out in the courts.

Recently, a federal judge in Kansas ruled that a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of farmers, grain handlers, and exporters who claim they suffered economic harm as a result of the Syngenta GMO corn scandal can proceed to trial.

Overview of Syngenta Corn Allegations

The Viptera lawsuits were filed because Syngenta’s MIR162 genetic traits, which were marketed under the brand name Viptera, were sold commercially despite the fact that MIR162 had not been approved in China.

In November 2012, China began rejecting any U.S. corn exports that tested positive for MIR162. The rejections continued until the country approved the trait last December 2014, but this approval came too late. As a result, farmers sued Syngenta for lost sales to China and a decline in corn prices.

Thousands of plaintiffs filed claims in both state and federal courts, although all were eventually consolidated into the U.S. District Court for Kansas. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge John Lungstrum rejected some of the claims made by farmers and grain dealers, but largely denied Syngenta’s motion to dismiss the bulk of the claims.

The Syngenta Viptera class action lawsuit alleges that China’s rejection of U.S. corn with the MIR162 trait led to an interruption in trade with China and affected commodity prices, causing economic damages of between $1 billion to nearly $3 billion to farmers and others affected by the markets. China said at the time it had not approved the GMO corn trait, which protects against certain corn pests, for import.

“Syngenta was negligent in the timing, scope and manner of commercializing Viptera and Duracade genetically modified corn in the U.S. knowing that China had not yet approved the corn,” argue the plaintiffs’ attorneys.

Syngenta argued that it marketed Viptera corn after it received full regulatory approval in the U.S. in 2010 and in other countries considered key export markets. In 2010 and 2011, however, China was not considered a key export market, claims Duane Martin, commercial product lead at Syngenta.

Judge Rules Syngenta Misled Farmers

However, Judge Lungstrum states in his ruling, “Syngenta misled the public and made misrepresentations to the public and the USDA concerning the status and likelihood and imminence of Chinese approval of the products and about the products’ impact on export markets.”

The judge also said the company misled the public regarding the ability to avoid Viptera entering the U.S. corn supply and the subsequent steps Syngenta took to avoid that problem. “Syngenta’s actions actually increased the risk of contamination and commingling of the corn,” the judge states.

More than 1,500 farmers, as of June, have filed Syngenta lawsuits.

The Syngenta GMO Corn Lawsuit MDL is known as In Re: Syngenta Ag MIR162 Corn Litigation, MDL No. 2591, in the U.S District Court, District of Kansas.