15 - The Hartford Insurance Company case: Antitrust in the global economy – welfare effects and sovereignty

Summary

This chapter is about the transnational reach of the United States' antitrust laws. It is not about extraterritoriality – at least not in the naive sense. Nor is it about subject matter jurisdiction. It is, however, very much about legislative or prescriptive jurisdiction. As such it engages a much done – some would say overdone – topic. Yet, when one considers the courts' latest encounter with the subject in Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California, one may surely be entitled to claim that there is more – a good deal more – to say.

Trivialization of the “effects” doctrine: Hartford Insurance and Moore – the issue stated

Hartford Insurance

In Hartford Insurance, nineteen states and a number of individuals, charged some thirty-one defendants, all members of the insurance industry, with conspiring to limit the availability of commercial general liability (CGL) insurance coverage in the plaintiff states, all in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act. CGL insurance protects the insured against liability to third parties for bodily injury or property damage. Until recently it has covered liability for injuries from toxic waste, asbestos, and other pollutants.

As told by the plaintiffs, the first conspiracy was led by four large U.S. insurance companies active as primary insurers in the CGL market (the primary insurer defendants).