A father and son’s lengthy ban from acting as company directors has been upheld by the appeal court.

In a judgment handed down in February, Deemster Aidan Christie QC said he had ’little option’ but to disqualify Jonathan Irving for eight years and son Jamie for seven years.

They were subsequently ordered to pay costs of more than £155,000 plus VAT to the island’s financial regulator.

Now that decision to disqualify them has been upheld by the appeal court which ruled it was neither wrong nor manifestly excessive.

It concluded: ’The defendants’ conduct, subject to their vehement denials and counter-attacks throughout, was not mere incompetence or over-optimism but amounted to a lack of commercial probity and a deliberate failure to pay some creditors and not others.

’Their culpability and lack of remorse for it and its consequences was well capable of justifying disqualification periods in the middle of six to 10 years.’

The disqualification relates to the Irvings’ Street Heritage Limited company, which was wound up by court order in February 2010 over non-payment of tax debts totalling £182,929.

Proceedings were brought by the island’s Financial Services Authority which said the Irvings had shown themselves unfit to serve as company directors.

The FSA identified seven areas of major concern - including allowing SHL to trade while insolvent and failing to file annual accounts.

All of these allegations were strongly denied by the Irvings.

They accepted they may have been remiss over filing of annual returns and accounts but insisted they had acted at all times in the best interests of Street Heritage and its creditors. They denied that SHL was ever insolvent and claimed it would have been able to pay any outstanding tax and avoid the winding-up order had various parties been willing to co-operate.

And the Irvings argued the real ’elephant in the room’ was the conduct of the government advocate and the alleged negligence of their own advocate at the winding up hearing.

They claimed that but for the actions of both advocates, the winding-up order would never have been made, the outstanding tax would have been paid and the company would have continued to trade. In his judgment, Deemster Christie said it was undoubtedly the case that the Irvings felt very strongly that they had been victims of a substantial injustice.

But he said the conduct of the advocates at the winding up hearing were not relevant to whether the Irvings were fit to act as directors. ’In my judgment, there is no elephant in the room,’ he said.

Judge of Appeal Jeremy Storey QC and Deemster Rosen QC said both Jonathan and Jamie Irving refused to accept any fault to the ’bitter end’, and this justified the concern that both should be disqualified for substantial periods.

They said Deemster Christie’s findings on solvency could not be challenged.

And they questioned the Irvings’ claim that but for the winding-up order, proceedings would never have been commenced - as all the relevant events occurred before the winding-up.

’We are not satisfied that the periods of disqualification were wrong or manifestly excessive,’ they said.

Deemster Christie had ordered that the Irvings must pay the FSA’s costs of £155,659 plus VAT making a total sum of £184,377.

Meanwhile, the Treasury has failed in a bid to seize costs awarded to the Irvings in a separate case and use them to pay off their tax debts.

In September last year, the high court ruled that Street Heritage’s advocate Jerry Carter had been negligent by not turning up in time for the 2010 winding-up hearing.

In a judgment that appears rather at odds with the latest appeal court ruling, Deemster Corlett concluded it would have been ’very probable’ that the court would have agreed to adjourn the case, giving the company time to attempt to put together a rescue package.

Deemster Corlett assessed the Irvings’ costs at up to £125,000 and ordered Jerry Carter and his law firm to pay £75,000 of that immediately, on account.

The Coroner for Glenfaba and Michael, on behalf of Treasury, applied for an arrestment order and the £75,000 used to pay off the Irvings’ debts. But Deemster Corlett dismissed the application, ruling the £75,000 payment must be paid to the Irvings for the sole purpose of paying their legal costs in their continuing claim against Carters.