By Colin Kruger
A NSW Supreme Court judgment has struck out claims that the trustee of the multibillion-dollar Pratt Family Holdings Trust acted fraudulently or dishonestly in excluding the late Richard Pratt’s love child, Paula Hitchcock, from the family fortune.
Hitchcock launched legal proceedings in the NSW Supreme Court in 2022 seeking inclusion in the trust that would entitle her to a share of assets valued in the tens of billions of dollars.
Paula Hitchcock and her husband, Nassib Thoumi, leave court after Wednesday’s decision.Credit: Nick Moir
The judgment by Justice Michael Meek on Wednesday gives Hitchcock leave to amend her statement of claim for a sixth time, but also struck out allegations of fraud or dishonesty by the trustee in excluding her from the trust in 2001 when she was a child.
Meek’s judgment said his decision was “partly a consequence of my finding that the alleged breaches to which the allegations relate cannot give rise to an inference of fraud or dishonesty”.
Billionaire Anthony Pratt Credit: Alex Ellinghausen
The basis of Hitchcock’s latest claim is that she was acknowledged as a member of the family by her father, Richard Pratt, and his wife, Jeanne Pratt, and deserves an equal slice of his fortune alongside his other children, billionaires Anthony Pratt, Heloise Waislitz and Fiona Geminder.
Richard Pratt died in 2009 and most of his fortune is contained in the family trust, which is now subject to dispute.
Hitchcock, who was born in 1997 from Pratt’s relationship with his long-time mistress, Shari-Lea Hitchcock, claims she was wrongfully excluded from the family trust when she was a child by her siblings.
According to documents filed with the court, “specified beneficiaries” of the trust are defined as being the children of Pratt and his wife, Jeanne.
However, Hitchcock is arguing that the couple acted as her parents — as defined in the trust deed — by including her in family gatherings with her half-siblings where they would all have witnessed their father’s “bonds of love and affection” for her.
This included Hitchcock having her own bedroom at the family’s Melbourne mansion, Raheen, where she often observed the weekly Shabbat — the Jewish day of rest — with them all, as well as receiving the care and support of Pratt’s wife, Jeanne.
Jeanne and the late Richard Pratt at their Melbourne mansion, Raheen.Credit: Simon O’Dwyer
Hitchcock’s claim also says payments of her expenses from the trust, dating back as far as August 2004, bolster her claim that she had been regarded as a member of the Pratt family.
She claims to have been excluded as a beneficiary of the trust in June 2001, “thereby increasing or potentially increasing the (Pratt children’s) future distributions”, documents filed with the court said. Hitchcock is now seeking to overturn this “Deed of Exclusion” in court.
Court submissions from the Pratt siblings state her claim has no reasonable prospects of success and should be struck out.
Paula Hitchcock was recognised in Richard Pratt’s will, along with her mother, Shari-Lea.Credit: Andrew Murray
Hitchcock has already received tens of millions of dollars from the Pratt family. She was recognised in Pratt’s will, along with her mother, Shari-Lea. She was reportedly left the Watsons Bay home in which she was raised by her mother, a rural property on the NSW South Coast and $23 million worth of shares.
In 2019, the Hitchcocks settled a claim for a larger slice of the family fortune with Jeanne Pratt. Around this time, another Pratt mistress, Sydney escort Madison Ashton, failed with her claim against Pratt’s estate.
The latest battle kicked off in April 2022 when Paula Hitchcock’s solicitors sent a letter to the trust requesting documentation and information in relation to the trust.
Days later, the trust’s law firm, Arnold Bloch Leibler, responded saying she was not a beneficiary of the trust.
The Business Briefing newsletter delivers major stories, exclusive coverage and expert opinion. Sign up to get it every weekday morning.