HBW Insight is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By


Hain Celestial To Pay $7.5M Under Proposed 'Organic' Class-Action Settlement

This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet

Executive Summary

Proposed settlement between Hain and plaintiffs across two related suits will provide refunds to consumers who purchased products in California from the firm's Avalon Organics and JASON personal-care lines before it brought its formulations and labeling claims into compliance with the state's Organic Products Act. It does not cover a separate suit against Hain for alleged misleading "natural" JASON claims.

You may also be interested in...

Babyganics Class Action Explores Issues Central To Organic Deception

Plaintiffs claim the SC Johnson brand’s marketing statements and name are clear attempts to capitalize on consumer demand for organic, but its product formulations fall short of organic standards and “reasonable consumer” expectations. Filed in New York’s Southern District, the proposed class action gets at the heart of issues recently discussed in an FTC/USDA roundtable.

The ‘Organic’ Personal-Care Quandary: Regulators May Lack Essentials To Act

The need for stronger federal oversight over the “organic” personal care segment has been somewhat lost in recent years amid clamoring for action on “natural” claims, but organic deception is still a problem, stakeholders say. However, neither USDA nor the FTC seems entirely equipped or ready to commit to increased involvement, based on discussion at a recent roundtable they held in Washington.

Why Preemption Defense Worked In Recent Neutrogena Suits, But Not Others

Consumer suits seeking changes to, or disclosures in, J&J/Neutrogena sunscreen labeling claims – beyond what FDA requires – are preempted in accordance with the FDA Modernization Act, which Congress intended to promote national regulatory uniformity, a California appellate court has ruled. OTC drug and cosmetic firms, including J&J, have been less successful with preemption arguments in other cases.

Latest Headlines
See All



Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts