Caught in a struggle of emotions and legal disputes, Australian pop sensation Vanessa Amorosi found herself on the verge of tears as she described the moment of shock when she discovered her trust fund, managed by her mother, was entirely depleted.
In a lawsuit ongoing in the Victorian Supreme Court, Amorosi is directly at odds with her mother, Joyleen Robinson. Central to the feud are two properties, whose purchase, the singer claims, was funded through her music royalties and earning.
A sprawling 8-hectare property in Narre Warren in Melbourne’s southeast where Robinson has resided for over twenty years along with Amorosi’s California residence, fall under the disputed properties, currently held under family trusts.
In a reactive move, Robinson is counterclaiming, pleading the court to validate a verbal agreement, wherein she was to take over the Narre Warren property by reimbursing her daughter the initial payout.
Amorosi, emotional yet determined, testified that her mother assumed control of her finances early in her career, fearing exploitation of her daughter’s fame. Amorosi expressed to the court how Robinson established multiple companies and trusts that managed her revenues and how she believed her mother was “taking care of me.”
Following her infamous performance of her hit-song ‘Absolutely Everybody’ during the Sydney Olympics in 2000, Amorosi revealed she immersed herself entirely in her touring career, although she ardently desired to purchase a home in Melbourne.
The Narre Warren home, chosen by her mother, was bought by Amorosi sight unseen, and she followed her mom’s guidance to add her name to the title ownership. The Narre Warren property was her “dream property,” as described by Amorosi.
However, during a rigorous cross-examination handled by Robinson’s lawyer, Daniel Harrison, Amorosi vehemently denied gifting the property to her mother.
Over the forthcoming years, the trust handling her earnings purchased additional properties, increasing their real estate portfolio. But the trust’s management came into question in 2014, when Amorosi was informed she couldn’t afford her Los Angeles home, triggering a family feud.
Amorosi was left shocked and helpless when she discovered her trust fund was empty, despite the “letters going back and forth to negotiate to seek more answers.”
Amorosi confessed that she believed Robinson had been excessively lenient with her finances. She disputed Harrison’s insinuation that she targeted the Narre Warren property due to her deteriorating financial circumstances.
During his opening remarks, Harrison outlined the main point of contention – whether a deal was struck in 2001 allowing Robinson to possess the Narre Warren property. He mentioned that his client would willingly sign over her interest in Amorosi’s California home if the pending mortgage on the Narre Warren residence was cleared.
The court anticipates hearing Robinson’s side of the story on Friday afternoon.
