A significant share of the successful businessman's fortune was bequeathed to his second wife. The remainder was split among his three children, five grandchildren, his first wife, and his two stepsons.
Two other grandchildren, Belinda and her sister Rachel, received nothing, although Rachel was later paid $20,000 in a settlement.
Belinda told the court she had a good relationship with her grandfather until her twenties, when her mother Danielle made allegations of abuse against Richard in 1996.
Richard denied the allegations, which Danielle withdrew later that year in return for a $20,000 settlement including a statement that said the claims against her father were unjustified and hurtful.
Still, Belinda said she felt it was "morally correct" to support her mother, which she claimed made her grandfather distance himself and refuse to see her and her children.
Belinda's uncle and stepmother disputed her account, saying she had not shown any interest in her grandfather, only visiting him once "some 30 years ago" and never again.
Notes from the lawyer who prepared the will with Richard when he was alive showed he felt he had no connection with Belinda.
One of the lawyer's handwritten notes said, "[Belinda] - Left whole family. Disappear. Surfer's Paradise? ... Doesn't keep in touch."
A High Court judge in 2021 dismissed Belinda's claim, saying it was understandable that a grandparent would treat one grandchild who had a close relationship with him differently to one with minimal or no contact.
She appealed against the decision, saying the judge failed to assess her needs for maintenance and support correctly.
Her lawyer Michael Locke claimed Richard made a "somewhat capricious decision" based on his perceived failure that she did not stay in touch.
Locke also said Belinda received nothing from Richard's estate despite its "substantial size" and ability to "meet all just claims against it in absolute terms, in contrast to the "significant provision" his five other grandchildren received.
Locke told the court that Belinda suffered from leukaemia and had no significant support from any other source.
The woman's uncle Nicholas, Richard's son, opposed the appeal, saying her leukaemia was well managed, and her financial position showed she was not in immediate need.
In its decision, the Court of Appeal said it was understandable that Belinda would take her mother's side at first, and the initial estrangement was not her fault.
But the fact remained that grandfather and grandchild had been estranged since 1996 until his death, when she was middle-aged, the decision read.
"She has not shown that the estrangement was his choice, he was not aware of any need for maintenance and support on her part, and he had provided for her mother, who is obliged in turn to provide for Belinda."
The High Court judge was not wrong to find that Richard owed no moral responsibility to provide separately for Belinda, the Court of Appeal said.
Belinda told Open Justice she was shocked and devastated at the decision, which had cost her a lot to fight, and there was a chance she may have to pay all the appeal costs as well.
"It's very very soul-destroying, actually," she said.
*All names have been changed by the court to protect the parties' identities.
