A company representing claimants in a class action against two island-based insurance firms says the proposed retrial of the £100m case should be independently investigated.

Investors have been left stunned after the acting Deemster tendered his resignation before handing down a long-overdue judgment.

One said: ‘I just don’t believe it. This is an absolute travesty. I am gutted. He had two years in which to hand down his judgment, and now just quits.’

But over two years on, Acting Deemster James Corbett KC has not handed down judgment. In that time a total of 17 claimants have now passed away out of the 739 who joined the class action.

Last Monday it was announced that the Acting Deemster had tendered his resignation on the grounds of ill health.

Chief registrar Stuart Quayle described the situation as ‘unprecedented’.

A suitably qualified acting Deemster has been identified to take over the case which could advance on the basis, wholly or partly, of audio recordings of the original trial.

Niall Coburn, managing director of Brisbane-based Coburn Corporate intelligence which brought the action on behalf of investors, said: ‘This is astonishing and unprecedented in any commonwealth legal system and should be independently investigated.

‘The court has clearly failed in ensuring that the Acting Deemster Corbett handed down a judgment within a reasonable timeframe.

’There is a total lack of integrity in the court’s dealings. This is shameful situation for the Isle of Man justice system where now sadly 17 investors have passed away in the class action. At all times the Deemster knew that the investor-claimants were elderly and vulnerable.’

He said that while the Acting Deemster suffered health problems in recent months, this did not explain or justify the significant delay prior to that.

‘There are serious questions as to how the court allowed that to happen, Mr Corburn said. ‘In England and Australia judges are expected to hand down judgment within three months of trial.

‘I also don't accept what the court said about this being an especially complicated and document heavy case. There is an awful lot of “back covering” in the communications coming from the court - they are quite rightly embarrassed about the situation and are on the defensive.’

The claimants, mainly British nationals and expats based across the world, were sold life assurance products based on investment funds which ultimately collapsed.

They argue that the companies misrepresented the products and failed to carry out minimum due diligence.

FPI and Utmost contest the claims.

A joint statement issued by the General Registry and the First Deemster said the court has been working ‘with all due expedition’ to find a suitably qualified and experienced Acting Deemster to take over the case.

Advancing the retrial using audio recordings and transcripts of the original trial could avoid the time delay and costs of a full in-person rehearing, it added.