Simeon v Prior (No.2)

In *Simeon v Prior (No.2)*, the Supreme Court of Western Australia was asked to determine whether a claim for equitable compensation for breach of fiduciary duty was statute-barred. The plaintiff, Mr. Simeon, alleged that the defendant, Mr. Prior, had breached his fiduciary duties as a director and shareholder of a company by improperly diverting company funds for his own benefit. Mr. Simeon sought equitable compensation for the losses suffered by the company as a result of these alleged breaches.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the limitation period prescribed by the *Limitation Act 1935* (WA) applied to claims for equitable compensation for breach of fiduciary duty, or whether such claims were subject to the equitable doctrine of laches. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether the six-year limitation period for actions to recover a debt or sum recoverable by virtue of a statute, or for damages for breach of contract, extended to equitable claims for compensation.

Judge Antoni Lucev reasoned that while the *Limitation Act 1935* (WA) applied to equitable claims in certain circumstances, the claim for equitable compensation in this instance was not analogous to a claim for a debt or damages for breach of contract. His Honour held that the equitable doctrine of laches, which requires a plaintiff to bring their claim within a reasonable time and without undue delay that would prejudice the defendant, was the appropriate principle to apply. The Court found that Mr. Simeon had not unduly delayed in bringing his claim, and therefore, the equitable claim was not barred.