Justice John Sacker this morning found there had been two distinct syndicates and Adams bought the ticket in May lotto only using funds he received from the winning syndicate members with no contribution from King.
The court heard that King was a regular contributor to the lotto syndicate which entered into the Powerball draw at his former workplace.
But Adams initiated a second, one-off syndicate involving 14 people on April 29. He arrived at work half an hour after Mr King had left for the day.
All of the regular factory lotto pool members, except King, were included in the second syndicate.
Justice Sackar said it was clear the workmates' "one-off syndicates did not always include the members of the core syndicate of the time".
He said "participation (was) totally left to (Adams') discretion".
"(Adams was) under no fiduciary obligation as alleged by the plaintiff and was therefore not in breach of any such duty," Justice Sackar said.
"Likewise, I do not regard him as contractually bound as alleged by the plaintiff nor was he in breach of any implied contractual term.
"Further, in my view, the estoppel case is not tenable. I am also of the view that the pooling case must fail. Consequently, the plaintiff fails in these proceedings."
Earlier, Shine Lawyers' Luke Whiffen, who represented King, said "we take King to be an honest, hardworking man and we hope the Court recognises the truth in his claim".
The Powerball winnings have already been paid to the "lucky 14" winners, with $2.7 million set aside pending the outcome of the hearing.
King previously told the court he was a regular contributor to the Powerball Jackpot, organised by Adams.
King said he believed he was part of the winning syndicate and was shocked to discover the day after the draw that he wasn't included.
The $2.7 million has been frozen pending the outcome of the case.
The court heard that Mr King still works for the same company, but is now at a different plant.
