A group of over 100 plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against Syngenta in an Illinois state court over the company’s allegedly premature release of Viptera corn onto the world market.

The plaintiffs accuse Syngenta AG and related companies of allowing a new variety of corn into the U.S. corn supply before that variety had been approved for import into China.

The farmers say that by planting the strain, which later would be rejected by Chinese import officials, they incurred financial losses due to lost business. They also expect they will continue to lose business in the future.

The plaintiffs are seeking an award of damages to compensate them for their business losses, and they are also seeking a court order mandating that Syngenta take steps to remediate the alleged contamination of the corn supply.

This Syngenta GMO Corn Lawsuit is Case No. 15-L-1219, filed in Madison County, Illinois, Circuit Court.

Syngenta Corn Lawsuits

The Madison County plaintiffs are just some of those bringing Viptera lawsuits against Syngenta, alleging the company’s release of the new corn variety caused an enormous drop in the price of corn.

More than 180 separate Syngenta lawsuits have been filed so far. Plaintiffs range from individual farmers to large agricultural corporations like Cargill Inc. and Archer Daniels Midland.

Viptera is a variety of corn developed by Syngenta to have a genetic trait known as MIR162. This generic modification results in corn that resists certain pests like the European corn borer.

Syngenta released Viptera corn for sale in 2010 with regulatory approval from the U.S. and other countries. But at the time of the release, Chinese officials had not yet approved Viptera for import.

In November 2013, with Syngenta’s application for Chinese regulatory approval still pending, Chinese officials found traces of Viptera in shipments of corn from the U.S.

China responded by not only rejecting those shipments but also banning all imports of U.S. corn. The ban stayed in place for over a year, until regulators finally approved Viptera for import in December 2014.

About the same time as the Chinese ban, the price of U.S. corn dropped substantially. Plaintiffs in the Syngenta lawsuits argue the loss of the entire Chinese market was the cause of the price drop. Syngenta disputes that theory, saying the price of corn was already falling before the Chinese ban went into effect.

The plaintiffs say that around the time Viptera was released, Syngenta misled them into believing that Chinese import approval was just around the corner, giving the impression that there was no real danger that China might reject Viptera corn. Plaintiffs say they planted Syngenta corn in reliance on those statements. They are now blaming Syngenta’s actions for hundreds of millions of dollars in losses.

One shipping company blames Syngenta for its having to file bankruptcy. In July 2015, Trans Coastal Supply Co. of Illinois filed for Chapter 11 protection.

The company blamed its financial situation on rejected shipments, breached contracts, and the decline in the price of corn, all allegedly associated with the Chinese ban. Trans Coastal has also filed its own Syngenta lawsuit separate from its bankruptcy proceedings.