Driscoll’s faces a proposed class-action lawsuit over alleged unflagged pesticide overages on imported berries, triggering a national debate that links whistleblower disclosures with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s decision not to order public recalls.

A proposed class-action lawsuit filed in Quebec Superior Court against U.S.-based berry giant Driscoll’s has opened a wider national debate over consumer disclosure and Canada’s food inspection framework.

The court application in Quebec alleges that Driscoll’s distributed fruit into Canadian grocery stores containing pesticide residues exceeding Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) established under Canadian law. According to reporting by CBC News, the Quebec lawsuit relies heavily on disclosures made in a California whistleblower retaliation suit by David Harada, Driscoll’s former manager of food safety and regulatory compliance for the U.S. and Canada. Harada alleges that approximately 50% of Driscoll’s berry exports to Canada between 2022 and 2024 carried non-compliant pesticide residues, estimating the value of affected exports at nearly $100 million.

Driscoll’s Response: Disputed Allegations and Testing Standards

Addressing the legal challenge, a representative of Driscoll’s tells The Packer:

“We are aware that a proposed class action has been filed in Quebec. The lawsuit is based largely on allegations made by former Driscoll’s employee David Harada in a California employment lawsuit filed long after his voluntary...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMijgFBVV95cUxQZGowQmE1d0FrZlNCdGpxRnRN...