A 29-year-old student has been ordered to hand over two Sydney properties and millions of dollars to his mother after Australian courts rejected his claim that the assets and cash had been given to him as a gift.
Allen Xu had argued that the money transferred by Jiyun Ma was his to spend as he wished. But two courts found that the funds were intended to be invested on behalf of his mother and that Xu held the money and property for her.
The dispute centred on about A$11.1 million transferred into accounts nominated by Xu between July 2021 and May 2022. The money was sent while he was living in Australia, with some of the payments routed through Singapore, Canada and a Chinese currency exchange business.
Ma told the court that her son had agreed to help safeguard and invest her money in Australia, including through a Morgan Stanley account. Xu denied discussing investments with her and maintained that the payments were an unconditional gift.
According to the Supreme Court of Victoria’s judgment, Xu used part of the money to buy property and pay for expensive personal items, including jewellery, restaurant meals, a car and cosmetic surgery. The court also heard that he later apologised to his mother and agreed to help return the money.
The court found that the property at Bennelong Parkway in Wentworth Point had been bought with Ma’s funds. It ordered that the home, together with the apartment at Harbour Street in Haymarket, be held on trust for her.
Xu was also ordered to return the remaining A$3.9 million, along with net rental income from the Bennelong property. Evidence before the court indicated that the property had been rented out for about A$780 a week.
The judgment said the Haymarket apartment had been acquired through a separate transfer from Ma, rather than directly with the funds used to buy the Bennelong property. Both assets were nevertheless found to belong beneficially to Ma.
The court placed particular weight on contemporaneous messages and documents, noting that Xu did not claim the money was a gift until he filed his defence. It found that the evidence showed the funds were not intended to become his property.
The latest appeal ruling has upheld that conclusion, leaving Xu liable to transfer the two Sydney properties and repay the money covered by the orders.
