'Unprecedented' situation after deemster in Island's first group litigation case resigns

Acting Deemster became 'significantly unwell' after hearing evidence

Hundreds of claimants awaiting a judgment in a multi-million-pound insurance case are facing further delays after the deemster allocated to the case resigned.

Evidence in the first ever group litigation claim to be issued on the Isle of Man was heard by Acting Deemster James Corbett KC in 2024.

Two combined cases, involving 739 claimants, centre around alleged mis-selling of investment products by Friends Provident International Limited and Utmost International Isle of Man.

The claimants are seeking damages for alleged misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, negligent misstatement and damages for breach of duty.

Both firms deny the claims

However before a judgment has been handed down Acting Deemster Corbett tendered his resignation on the grounds of his own ill health.

His ‘significant health difficulties’ include a serious fall and a stroke which have left him ‘significantly unwell’.

‘Unprecedented’

In a joint statement, issued by the General Registry and His Majesty’s First Deemster, the situation has been described as ‘unprecedented’ for the Island.

Chief Registrar Stuart Quayle said: “This is an unprecedented set of circumstances for the Isle of Man justice system and most unfortunate for all involved.

“The significance and complexity of the case only serve as an added and unwelcome difficulty.

“It has always been in the best interests of all involved that the deemster who heard the original trial be the one to issue the judgment.

“This was a lengthy trial with a high volume of evidence and submissions and therefore the impact of a retrial would be significant to the parties.

 “We have continuously liaised with the acting deemster and his physicians in an attempt to ensure reasonable and realistic timeframes are set given all of the circumstances.

“The significant health issues which the acting deemster has encountered were not foreseeable by anyone, least of all the acting deemster, and mean that it is not realistically possible for him to continue to determine this case and produce the judgment.

“Our focus now is on the appointment of a suitable new acting deemster and the swift advancement of the case to a close.

“We wish the Acting Deemster Corbett KC well in his recovery.”

New Deemster

The court has been working with ‘all due expedition’ to find a suitably qualified and experienced acting deemster to advance the case from this point.

The size and complexity of it requires specialist knowledge and judicial experience.

An appropriate individual has now been identified - a former judge to the High Court of England and Wales who has indicated their availability to take the matter forward.

Formal appointment steps are now being taken and a case management hearing could take place in August 2026 to timetable the next steps.  

It’s hoped that any retrial could advance on the basis, wholly or partly, of the audio recordings and transcripts of the original trial along with bundles of documents.

This, it’s said, could place the new acting deemster in a position ‘sufficiently close’ to that of the original trial deemster without incurring the time delay and costs of a full in-person re-hearing.  

‘Unacceptable’

His Majesty’s First Deemster and Clerk of the Rolls Andrew Corlett said: “A delay of two years in the issuing of any judgment is unacceptable.

“Once a judge is allocated to a case it would be highly unusual and constitutionally improper for them to be removed involuntarily without good cause.

“The acting deemster allocated to this case has suffered significant health difficulties and it is most unfortunate that this has caused the delay.

“The resignation of a deemster is the last option which any party, or the court, would have wished but it is reluctantly accepted as the only realistic option available to ensure the parties now receive a decision in a timely manner.

“Care must be taken to ensure that a judge allocated to a case is free to manage it and deliver judgment entirely independently in accordance with the rule of law.

“Whilst this development will be frustrating to the parties involved in this case, the matter can now advance with a credible prospect of a decision being given in the near future.”

The original hearing lasted 20 days over a six-week period and concluded in May 2024.  

There is no timeframe in law for the delivery of a judgment.