A disciplinary body has ruled that an Acting Deemster who resigned mid-trial was in breach of the judiciary’s code of conduct.
The outcome of a multi-million-pound court case was thrown into confusion after Acting Deemster James Corbett resigned through ill health earlier this year. Attempts to arrange a re-trial are being made.
The Judicial Conduct Office said in a statement that Corbett told the First Deemster Andrew Corlett was “ashamed about the delay”.
Corbett was allocated to two linked cases, Kells & Others v Friends Provident International Limited and Dickinson & Others v Utmost International Isle of Man Limited. More than 700 investors, many of whom say they lost their life savings, joined the class action.
Complaints against Corbett were lodged with the JCO, which has now released a statement following the inquiry, stating: “The First Deemster is satisfied that Mr Corbett did contravene the Code of Conduct by failing to decide this case within a reasonable time.
It added: “The complaint is upheld against a background of Mr Corbett’s misconduct, ill health and the fact that a finished judgment has never been produced despite the First Deemster’s interventions.”
In May 2024, Corbett concluded the hearing of the stage one trial of a group litigation involving the alleged mis-selling of products. He said a judgment would be circulated in autumn that year. New timescales were later issued with a “long-stop date” of June 2025. But the deadlines were missed. A complaint was then made to the JCO.
Corbett accepted there were “no reasonable grounds” for the delay and that he had failed to manage his workload.
The Acting Deemster suffered a serious fall in November 2025, which further “impacted” the circulation of the judgment and the First Deemster called a meeting, which took place in January 2026.
The statement explained: “Mr Corbett met with the First Deemster, during which he stated that he was ashamed about the delay and offered his resignation.
“The First Deemster stressed the reputational damage to the island’s judiciary and the detriment to the parties arising from the delay.”
Just days after the meeting, Corbett suffered a stroke and, following a medical assessment in March 2026 a, new timetable was set out. However, further medical issues arose and, in June, “Mr Corbett accepted he had made over-optimistic commitments and had underestimated his health”.
As a result, he tendered his resignation on medical grounds.
Loss of Confidence
The JCO statement said: “A delay of the magnitude in this case is plainly unacepptable and leads not only to frustration and added anxiety for the parties but also more generally to a loss of public confidence in our justice system.”
Referring to other concerns raised, the JCO statement said: “It has been alleged that Mr Corbett has undertaken new roles in Australia and Leicester. These specific allegations were made after Mr Corbett had resigned.
“However, based on a response from Mr Corbett, it appears that these new roles do not involve substantial professional activity. Most, if not all, Acting Deemsters combine their sitting duties with other professional practice.
“The ability to hold other roles is not relevant to an assessment as to whether one is able to carry out the functions of an Acting Deemster.”
No Further Action
The statement concludes that the First Deemster was “satisfied” that Corbett contravened the Code of Conduct by “failing to decide this case within a reasonable time”.
It added: “The complaint is upheld against a background of Mr Corbett’s misconduct, ill health and the fact that a finished judgment has never been produced despite the First Deemster’s interventions.”
However, in light of Corbett’s resignation, which had already been accepted by the Lieutenant Governor, “no further disciplinary action is necessary or, arguably, permissible”.