Daughter to hand Shari-lea Hitchcock cut of Pratt estate

The daughter of Shari-lea Hitchcock and Richard Pratt has agreed to divide her father’s inheritance with her mother.

Paula Hitchcock, daughter of Richard Pratt and Shari-lea Hitchcock.

The teenage daughter of Shari-lea Hitchcock and Richard Pratt has agreed in principle to divide her father’s inheritance with her mother in a confidential settlement ending years of bitter wrangling over the Pratt estate.

The deal, thrashed out early last month between lawyers for Shari-lea, her daughter Paula and the executor of the Pratt estate, wife Jeanne, will see Paula give up a portion of what was left to her by her mogul father in favour of her mother.

The settlement, if approved by the Victorian Supreme Court, will end Ms Hitchcock’s long-running and acrimonious legal fight against Jeanne Pratt for a greater share of the cardboard king’s ­dynasty.

Ms Hitchcock had an 18-year affair with Pratt and claimed that as the billionaire’s “domestic partner” and de facto, she had not been adequately provided for in the will after he died in 2009.

It is understood Ms Hitchcock turned to the Supreme Court in Victoria, where the Pratt dynasty is based, in her bid for a larger slice of the estate after she lost a NSW Supreme Court claim for more than $60 million in property.

The NSW court rejected Ms Hitchcock’s claim, finding that the properties were owned by Pratt’s Visy Group, not Pratt, and therefore were not among his personal assets when he died.

Despite being one of Australia’s richest men, Pratt’s estate was limited, with his vast wealth tied up in trusts and companies associated with the Visy Group or already distributed.

Paula was the main beneficiary of his will and was left with a harbourside mansion in ­Sydney’s Watson’s Bay, rural property close to the Ms Hitchcock’s extended family, and $23m in private shares when she turns 21.

Her mother was left with the shares in a company set up by Pratt, but which were put in trust under the control of a trustee.

In the mediation to thrash out the settlement, Paula’s interests were protected by litigation guardian Geoffrey Evans, who was appointed by the Hitchcock family.

After more than four years of litigation the matter was settled between the Hitchcocks and the Pratts only last month after it was agreed to put the claim on the backburner while the estate fought another multi-million-­dollar claim by Pratt’s other mistress, Sydney escort Madison Ashton.

Ms Ashton, another long-time lover of the businessman, claimed Pratt promised to look after her and her two children when she became his mistress in the early 2000s.

Her initial court action in the NSW Supreme Court failed after judge Paul Brereton ruled that while conversations with Pratt about an arrangement probably took place, they did not amount to a legally binding ­contract.

Despite owing the Pratt estate tens of thousands of dollars in legal costs, Ms Ashton launched an appeal against the decision in 2012.

Earlier this year, the NSW Court of Appeal rejected the move, claiming Pratt did not ­intend to create a contract, leaving Ms Hitchcock free to negotiate her case under the Victoria jurisdiction.

Lawyers for the Pratt family, and Shari-lea and Paula Hitchcock refused to comment.