A Chinese student has been ordered by the Supreme Court of Victoria to repay nearly $5 million and transfer two properties back to his mother after admitting to squandering funds she provided for investment. Allen Xu, 29, received approximately $18 million from his mother, Jiyun Ma, over six years, with a significant portion intended for Sydney real estate investment. However, Xu largely used the money for personal luxuries, including cosmetic surgery, high-end jewelry, a car, and a lavish apartment.

Court Rejects Gift Claim, Orders Repayment

The Supreme Court and a subsequent Court of Appeal ruled against Xu’s assertion that the substantial sums were an outright gift. A key factor in the court’s decision was a series of remorseful WeChat messages Xu sent to his mother. In these messages, he described himself as “greedy, dishonest, immoral, and a very bad person,” admitting he “couldn’t control the devil living in my heart.” These admissions significantly undermined his legal defense.

Timeline of Funds and Expenditures

The financial arrangements began around 2020 when Ms. Ma sent her son $5 million. This initial sum was intended to help Xu qualify for a business innovation and investment visa, following the completion of his Master of Economics degree at the University of Sydney, which Ms. Ma also funded. Ms. Ma, who has never visited Australia, subsequently transferred nearly $2 million in April 2021 for the purchase of a $1.8 million property in Haymarket, Sydney, which was registered in Xu’s name.

Between July 2021 and May 2022, Ms. Ma made nine further transfers from Chinese and Canadian banks, totaling $11,133,322. This money was explicitly designated for investment in Australian property on her behalf. Instead of adhering to his mother’s instructions, Xu diverted these funds. He purchased a property in Wentworth Point and indulged in luxury items, including cosmetic eyelid surgery, while depositing the remaining balance into a personal bank account.

Apology and Court Proceedings

By June 2022, Ms. Ma became aware of her son’s actions and demanded the return of her money. Xu sought assistance from his uncle, referred to as Mr. Peng in court documents, to draft an apology to his mother. Early drafts revealed Xu’s acknowledgment of his arrogance and misuse of his mother’s hard-earned wealth. He admitted to satisfying his own desires, expanding his social circle, and being “vain.”

Mr. Peng advised Xu that a simple apology was insufficient and that he needed to explain his deceptions. Xu had misled his mother about opening a bank account in his father’s name for the funds, when in reality, he opened it under his own name. He also provided an unrealistic explanation for spending approximately $250,000 on “living necessities.” Further discrepancies arose regarding the conversion of Ms. Ma’s funds from USD to AUD without her knowledge and an unaccounted sum of $350,000.

In a subsequent draft, Xu elaborated on the bank account issue, stating he feared his mother would “blame me for my incompetence” if she knew he opened it in his own name. He reiterated his self-condemnation, calling himself an “embezzler” and expressing deep regret. He confessed, “I know that these things don’t belong to me, the money doesn’t belong to me, and I don’t have the ability to earn that much money. But under the circumstances at the time, I really couldn’t control the devil living in my heart.”

Court’s Findings and Appeal Rejection

During the court proceedings, Xu attempted to disavow the second draft of the apology. However, the court found this implausible, noting the draft contained specific details about his cosmetic surgery, the Wentworth Point property, and luxury purchases, which were corroborated by property deeds, bank records, and transaction histories. The court concluded that Mr. Peng could not have fabricated such granular details.

The final apology message was sent to Ms. Ma in late June. Following this, she requested power of attorney over his financial accounts, which he granted. Ms. Ma subsequently evicted Xu from the Haymarket unit. Xu sent further messages acknowledging the Haymarket and Wentworth Point properties as his mother’s and promising to ensure their safety and avoid causing further distress.

Xu’s appeal argued that he signed the power of attorney under duress and that his eyelid surgery had impaired his vision, making it impossible to have written the second draft. He presented photographic evidence of his swollen eyes. The court dismissed these claims, noting the surgery occurred three weeks prior to the letter’s writing and deeming it implausible that he could not read the draft while having written an earlier handwritten letter. The court also referenced messages where Xu referred to the Haymarket unit as “your property,” reinforcing the conclusion that signing the power of attorney was consistent with acknowledging the property was not his.

Final Judgment and Financial Order

Ms. Ma initiated civil proceedings in November 2022, seeking the return of funds despite having regained access to approximately $7 million and both properties, as she was still significantly out of pocket. Her claim focused on the $11.1 million transferred between 2021 and 2022, excluding the initial $5 million for the visa and the $2 million for the Haymarket property.

In June 2025, Justice David Croft delivered the primary judgment in favor of Ms. Ma. The order mandated Xu to repay $3,120,445.72, along with $989,063.04 in interest. Furthermore, Xu was declared to hold the Haymarket and Wentworth Point properties in trust for his mother and was required to take all necessary steps to transfer ownership to her.

Xu’s appeal further contested the findings, denying he acknowledged the properties were not his and maintaining the money was a gift. He cited a 2016 conversation where his mother expressed a desire to compensate him for lost time during his childhood, suggesting the funds were intended as a gift. However, Ms. Ma’s legal team successfully argued that this statement was conditional on her passing away, which did not occur. The Court of Appeal ultimately upheld the initial judgment, rejecting Xu’s appeal and confirming his obligation to repay his mother.