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.

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.

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.

Loading

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.