An application for a fresh inquest into the deaths of 50 people in the 1973 Summerland fire disaster has been rejected by the Isle of Man's Attorney General.

A group representing some of the victims and survivors of the tragedy made a formal submission in March, calling to reopen the case.

Justice for Summerland, who previously called for the original misadventure verdicts for the 50 people that died to be overturned, said the decision not to order a fresh inquest was "deplorable".

The Attorney General said there was "no fresh evidence revealing any relevant or material errors or misunderstanding" in the original investigation in 1974.

About 3,000 people were at the Summerland entertainment complex when a blaze broke out on the evening of 2 August 1973.

It was thought to have been started by three boys from Liverpool smoking.

A public inquiry held in the aftermath found there were "no villains" and only human beings who made mistakes.

Belfast-based human rights law firm Phoenix Law, which represented the families, had made the application for a new inquest, saying there had been an "irregularity of proceedings in the original inquest" which had not commented on or addressed "substantial issues" including the cause of the fire.

However, a spokesman for the Attorney General's Chambers said the investigations and findings of the report produced in May 1974, produced by the Summerland Fire Commission, "comprised a thorough, effective and proportionate inquiry into how the fire took hold and spread, and how it came to be so fatal".

He said: "The application made to the Attorney General presents no fresh evidence revealing any relevant or material errors or misunderstanding in the detailed findings of the Summerland Commission Report.

"Speculation that there might be evidence which might call the commission's findings into question does not constitute relevant fresh evidence."

"The 1974 verdicts place no responsibility whatsoever on the innocent victims."

The Justice for Summerland group has called it a "deplorable decision" that they aim to challenge "before the High Court".

Phoenix Law previously said it wanted to reopen the case to "ensure a comprehensive investigation" using "modern legal and forensic standards".

In a letter from the Attorney General to the law firm, it said it recognised the sensitivity around the case, but had to consider the legal basis for reopening it without emotion.

He added that nothing said was intended to add to "their burden or ongoing grief" and he was "very sorry if it does so".

Phoenix Law has been contacted for a response.