Singer-songwriter Vanessa Amorosi has emphatically denied she ever agreed to hand over full ownership of a Melbourne home to her mother.
The Narre Warren property is central to the 42-year-old’s legal case against her mother Joyleen Robinson, which has gone to trial in the Victorian Supreme Court.

Amorosi claims the $650,000 used to purchase the home in 2001 came from a trust account set up to receive all of her earnings as a singer-songwriter.

Vanessa Amorosi leaves the Supreme Court of Victoria in Melbourne, Thursday, October 12, 2023. Singer Vanessa Amorosi is suing her mother for ownership of two properties bought as a result of her success. (AAP Image/Aaron Francis) NO ARCHIVING
Vanessa Amorosi leaving the Supreme Court of Victoria in Melbourne. (AAP)

She is seeking full ownership of the property, which currently has her and her mother listed as joint-owners.

Robinson claims in early 2001, Amorosi agreed to hand over full ownership of the Narre Warren home if her mother paid her $650,000 when she asked.

The mother said she gave Amorosi $710,000 for the loan to her current American home and therefore the ownership of the Narre Warren property should only be under her name.

Joyleen Robinson, mother of singer Vanessa Amorosi (right). (Nine)

During cross-examination, Amorosi repeatedly denied any agreement was made.

But Robinson’s barrister Daniel Harrison suggested to Amorosi she did not have a good memory and the agreement did take place.

He also put to her that she bought the Narre Warren home for her mother and she never considered it her own property.

Amorosi denied that assertion, saying it was the first home she bought for herself and she always thought of it as hers.

“My mum wanted that property from day one, no matter what,” Amorosi told the court.

“She made it very clear it was her dream property.”

Vanessa Amorosi in the video clip for her hit song 'Absolutely Everybody'.
Vanessa Amorosi in the video clip for her hit song “Absolutely Everybody”. (YouTube)

Harrison also suggested Amorosi had launched the legal proceedings because she was in a difficult financial situation, which Amorosi denied.

The barrister told Justice Steven Moore that Amorosi’s recollections were unreliable, not from malice but simply because she had a poor memory.

Harrison said it ultimately came down to two people with very different accounts of what did or didn’t happen.

Moore should see that Robinson’s recollection was the only sensible one, Harrison said.

Robinson is due to give evidence in the trial on Friday afternoon.

You May Also Like

US egg prices increase to record high, dashing hopes of cheap eggs by Easter

US egg prices increased again last month to reach a new record-high…

Diddy’s defense-team shakeup will put star lawyer Mark Geragos in leading role — after he repped Hunter Biden, Michael Jackson and Chris Brown

There are more changes coming to Diddy’s legal team, Page Six hears.…

Supreme Court: Government Must 'Facilitate' Return of Deported Migrant…Eventually

The Supreme Court today issued a brief order today which partly…

NYC Hudson River helicopter crash victims are identified as tech boss, his wife and three children

The Spanish family of five – including three children – killed on…