Another group of farmers has joined the growing litigation against Syngenta by filing a Syngenta lawsuit alleging that the company failed to “act responsibly” when releasing the MIR162 genetic strain of corn.

The Syngenta lawsuit states that biotechnology companies have a responsibility to an affected industry as a whole, which in Syngenta’s case includes industry stakeholders and individual corn farmers.

The farmers bringing the lawsuit claim that Syngenta failed in its duty to “act responsibly in introducing new bio-engineered genetic traits into the market.”

According to the Syngenta lawsuit, the company had been warned not to introduce another MIR genetic trait until the product had been approved in export markets, as premature commercialization could cause potentially serious consequences.

However, the corn GMO lawsuit claims, Syngenta prioritized personal financial gain over the fate of the corn industry as a whole and introduced the new genetic strain before China approved MIR162 for import.

Farmers, acting on Syngenta’s word, invested in the new strain and grew crops that China eventually rejected. The resulting decline in corn prices was, according to the lawsuit, largely based on Syngenta’s actions. The initial economic harm to U.S. corn farmers was estimated between $1 billion and $2.9 billion.

The Syngenta lawsuit claims that the company’s failure did not end with MIR162, and that it continued to value corporate profit over industry success when it again sold a new strain, similar to MIR162, for the 2014 crop year. This action led to more financial gain for Syngenta, but ultimately prolonged the economic harm to the U.S. corn industry.

“Adding insult to injury,” the lawsuit states, “Syngenta actively misled farmers, industry participants and others about the importance of the Chinese market,” as well as the potential effects of releasing the MIR162 strain into the corn market.

The lawsuit alleges that Syngenta significantly downplayed the potential fallout, and led the United States Department of Agriculture and the public to believe there would be no ill effects.

The latest Syngenta lawsuit brings multiple accusations, including but not limited to violation of the Lanham Act, violation of the Illinois consumer fraud statute, gross negligence, tortious interference with existing business relationships, and violations of state deceptive and unfair trade practices acts and consumer protection statutes.

Syngenta Lawsuits

This Syngenta lawsuit, and others like it, claim that Syngenta is responsible for its actions and their repercussions within the corn industry. The Syngenta litigation will require the court to identify how much of the corn price drop can be attributed to Syngenta’s actions regarding MIR162.

If successful, settlement money will, at the very least, return a portion of the lost corn price back to the farmers who have lost money.

If you have been negatively affected by Syngenta’s decision to prematurely release the Viptera MIR162 strain of corn, you may be able to file a Syngenta lawsuit, or join a Syngenta class action lawsuit.

The Syngenta Lawsuit reported here is Burke v. Syngenta AG, et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-50216, in the U.S. District Court for the Western Division of the North District of Illinois.