Julian Wright, a son of the late mining magnate Peter Wright, has lost his legal claim for a multi-million dollar slice of the family fortune.

Mr Wright had alleged that his siblings Michael Wright and Angela Bennett had deceived him about the value of Wright Prospecting before he sold his shareholding for nearly $7 million dollars in 1987.

He had claimed the assets in his father's estate had not been fully and accurately disclosed and he did not gain fair value for the interests he gave up.

Mr Wright wanted to be reinstated as a one-third shareholder and as a beneficiary of the estate.

WA Supreme Court Justice Rene Le Miere did find that Julian Wright was not paid what he was entitled to. 

Justice Le Miere said, "Michael and Angela breached the fiduciary duty they owed as executor to Julian as a beneficiary of the estate".

He said the siblings had not told their brother everything.

"There was little, if anything, done by or on behalf of Michael and Angela to inform Julian of all matters of which they were aware material to his decision to sell his interest in Peter's estate to them."

But the case has failed, largely because of a deed signed in 2008, which Justice Le Miere said precluded the "granting of relief to Julian".

Long and difficult history

Peter Wright had explored the Pilbara region with Lang Hancock, identifying large iron ore deposits.

Their partnership gained control of reserves and tenements which proved to be extremely valuable. 

Peter Wright died in 1985.

In 1987, Julian sold his interest in his father's estate, his shareholding in Wright Prospecting and relinquished his place as an executor to brother Michael and sister Angela. 

After February 1987, Michael and Angela each owned half of the shares in Wright Prospecting.

In 2008, a Deed of Settlement was executed to resolve legal proceedings brought by children of Julian Wright in 2001, and a counterclaim brought by Julian against Michael and Angela.

In this counterclaim, Julian Wright contended he was induced into the 1987 sale through duress or undue influence.

Supreme Court Justice Rene Le Miere found the 2008 Deed of Settlement which followed a period of mediation was crucial.

The Deed of Settlement resulted in $70 million dollars going to Julian's children, and among the commitments by the parties, Julian resolved not to sue.

This formed the crux of a defence to the latest legal action. 

Loading

After Michael Wright died in 2012, leaving more than $1 billion to his children, there were media reports that he and his sister were worth nearly $3 billion.

A friend of Julian Wright's looked through the documentation from the 2008 proceedings and told him, "You've been had".

But Justice Le Miere found that Julian Wright's claims were barred by the Deed of Settlement.

Deed clause crucial to outcome

A clause of the deed provided that "none of the parties [or their privies] will bring any claim against any other party and each party releases the other parties in respect of any claim" connected with various elements, including Michael and Angela's conduct as executors.

Justice Le Miere said the words in the deed encompassed all of the claims brought by Julian Wright in the latest action. 

He also said Julian Wright had breached the Deed of Settlement by instituting the action, and his claims regarding alleged fraud were time-barred since 1993.

Justice Le Miere accepted that "substantial prejudice" was caused to the defendants as a result of the delay in bringing the proceedings.

He also found Julian Wright had not established breaches in relation to the acquisition of his Wright Prospecting shares.