WAWASC
KITAY -v- FRIGGER [No 2] [2024] WASC 113 (10 April 2024)
[2024] WASC 113
Supreme Court of WA|2024-05-23|Before: Hill J
View original sourceAt a glance
Source factsCourt
Supreme Court of WA
Decision date
2024-05-23
Before
Hill J
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Judgment (255 paragraphs)
[1]
- These proceedings were commenced on 3 August 2021. The defendants contend that in so far as any agreement was entered into prior to 3 August 2015, the plaintiffs are prevented from obtaining any relief by reason of s 13 of the Limitation Act 2005 (WA) (Limitation Act). The defendants say that, as a consequence, the plaintiffs cannot obtain any relief, including any declaratory relief, in respect of the First HSF Costs Agreement and Second HSF Costs Agreement, both of which were entered into prior to this date.
- The plaintiffs deny the relief sought by them in these proceeding is statute barred. This is for two reasons. First, the relief sought under s 477(2B) and s 1322(4)(a) of the Act are not causes of action but involve administrative matters. Second, in any event, the plaintiffs say that in so far as they seek declaratory relief, any cause of action only accrued when a justiciable controversy came into existence, which did not occur prior to 3 August 2015.
- The Limitation Act applies to causes of action under the Act by reason of s 79 and s 80 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth).[133] Pursuant to s 13 of the Limitation Act, an action 'on any cause of action' cannot be commenced if six years have elapsed since the cause of action accrued. of the applies to equitable actions which are not analogous to other actions, and similarly requires actions to be commenced within six years. An equitable action is defined to mean an action in which equitable relief is sought.