International pop star Vanessa Amorosi will have one more thing to celebrate on her birthday after winning a years-long legal battle against her mother.
Amorosi, who turned 43 on Thursday, sued Joyleen Robinson in the Victorian Supreme Court for full ownership of two properties bought as a result of her commercial success.
One was an eight-hectare property at Narre Warren in Melbourne's southeast where Mrs Robinson lives, while the second was Amorosi's current residence in California.
Mrs Robinson argued the Narre Warren property should belong to her as she had paid her daughter the $650,000 they agreed to back in 2001.
But Supreme Court Justice Steven Moore on Thursday ruled the supposed agreement between the pair never happened and Amorosi should have full ownership of the Narre Warren property.
Justice Moore also found that Amorosi should be the sole owner of her Californian home, but the judge agreed Mrs Robinson should receive close to $900,000 in restitution from Amorosi.
The legal battle started in March 2021 when Amorosi launched Supreme Court proceedings against Mrs Robinson.
During a five-day trial in October, Amorosi and her mother both gave evidence, with the performer taking breaks to wipe away tears and compose herself.
Amorosi claimed the $650,000 used to purchase the Narre Warren home in 2001 came from a trust account set up to receive all of her singer-songwriter earnings.
The house was in both her and her mother's names, with Mrs Robinson alleging Amorosi agreed to hand over full ownership of the Narre Warren home if she paid $650,000 when asked.
Mrs Robinson maintained the agreement was made in February 2001 during a conversation in the kitchen of their former family home.
Mrs Robinson said she handed over $710,000 to Amorosi in 2014 for the loan she took out on her American home, maintaining she fulfilled her end of the housing pact.
But Amorosi told the court she should have full ownership as there was never any agreement in place.
The singer also sought to be the sole owner of her current Californian residence, which was bought through a trust account set up by her mother.
Justice Moore ruled the agreement between Amorosi and her mother never happened and the Narre Warren property should be under Amorosi's name alone.
"The shifting and inconsistent course of Mrs Robinson's evidence leaves me entirely unconvinced that there existed a Narre Warren agreement as alleged," the judge said in his reasons.
"I did not find Mrs Robinson to be a reliable witness in her evidence to the court."
Justice Moore also rejected defence claims that Amorosi was evasive or vague in her evidence.
"It is entirely unsurprising that some of Ms Amorosi's evidence about conversations she had with her mother more than 20 years ago when she was an 18-year-old touring the world as an international pop star was general and non-specific," he said.
Justice Moore also found Amorosi should be the sole owner of her Californian home, but he agreed Mrs Robinson should receive restitution for the contribution she made to Amorosi's property in 2014.
He ordered Amorosi pay her mother $650,000 plus $219,486.33 in interest.
Amorosi did not attend court for Thursday's judgment, with her barrister Joel Fetter saying his client was still in the US.
Mrs Robinson was also not in attendance, though some of her family members watched on in court.
