Over two years ago, the European Commission (“EC”) initiated an inquiry into the state of competition in the European Union (“EU”) business insurance industry.  In explaining the purpose of the inquiry, the EC notes in its Final Report that “[t]aking into account indications that competition in this sector within the common market may be restricted or distorted, the sector inquiry aimed at further investigating the sector and the practices concerned with a view to ultimately identifying any concrete restrictive practices or distortions of competition that may fall within the scope of Articles 81 or 82 of the Treaty.” 

Laying to rest antitrust claims that have embroiled dozens of insurance companies and the nation’s largest insurance brokers for well over two years in In re Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation, MDL 1663 (D.N.J.), Chief Judge Garrett Brown dismissed claims by putative class plaintiffs that the U.S. insurance industry was riddled with unlawful conspiracies to restrain trade. 

Following a three-year investigation, the Ohio Attorney General filed suit last week against Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. and four insurers, alleging violations of Ohio’s antitrust laws.  The complaint contends that Marsh and the insurers conspired to eliminate competition in the market for commercial casualty insurance in Ohio during the 2001 through 2004 time period. 

On July 23, 2007, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. announced settlements of recent investigations for a total of $115 million in restitution and penalties.  Specifically, the Company entered into a settlement with the New York Attorney General’s Office relating to an investigation of variable annuity market timing issues.