A divorce lawyer has been accused in court of "confiscating" child maintenance payments from an indebted client to the tune of $5,000.

KJAZ 98.1FM owner Leo Trott claimed in Supreme Court that Keren Lomas had no business taking the monthly payments he made for his teenage daughter to clear a debt owed to her by his ex-wife Barbara Carroll-Trott.

But Ms Lomas' attorney Juliana Snelling told Chief Justice Richard Ground it was Ms Carroll-Trott's decision to pay the legal fees she owed Ms Lomas using the money from Mr. Trott.

"I take great objection and umbrage to the word 'confiscated', that he used twice, and 'stripped'," said Ms Snelling. "These are words he has used in the press in a smear campaign against Ms Lomas."

Friday's appeal was brought by Ms Lomas against an order made by Magistrate Tyrone Chin last October that she was not entitled to keep the payments and should pay the money back.

Ms Snelling told the court that Ms Carroll-Trott, having been granted "care and control" custody of the child, had the right to decide how best to spend maintenance payments and that Ms Lomas was entitled to the funds.

She argued that since the legal fees were spent on trying to get the best possible maintenance award for her daughter, the money did benefit the girl, who is now aged 17.

"The mother did nothing wrong, on receipt of payment, to apply the money coming into the pot from the father towards the legal fees," said Ms Snelling. "We say the funds were not improperly used."

Mr. Trott, part-owner of LTT Broadcasting, has represented himself since filing a civil action against Ms Lomas for the return of the funds.

He said yesterday he was granted joint custody of his daughter and had the right to make financial decisions concerning her care.

He claimed Ms Lomas' decision to "confiscate" the payments he made to her office for his daughter went against the spirit of the maintenance order put in place after he and his American ex-wife got divorced.

Mr. Trott, 45, submitted a letter faxed to him yesterday morning from his ex-wife in which she wrote she was "coerced and intimidated" into agreeing to the maintenance payments going to Ms Lomas to clear her debt.

Ms Snelling said the letter went "completely against" previous letters and an affidavit from Ms Carroll-Trott.

Mr. Trott said: "Ms Lomas had no more right than a magistrates' court cashier that has received money on behalf of the collections office to keep that money for whatever reason."

He added: "You have to think of the human aspect of the case. My daughter lives on the brink of poverty in the US while Ms Lomas enjoys a privileged lifestyle in Tucker's Town.

"There is no reason why she couldn't have been more compassionate to my daughter and my ex-wife to see that my daughter lives above basic living standards."

Ms Snelling said it was "wrong and prejudicial and awful" to suggest that Ms Lomas was stripping his daughter of anything, when it was "absolutely" the girl's mother's choice to use the maintenance to pay her lawyer.

She claimed Mr. Trott had a monthly income of more than $7,000 and was "perfectly in a position, given his status, to send money directly to his daughter". He countered that he earned slightly more than $4,000 a month, which was "hardly enough to live on".

Mr. Justice Ground reserved his judgement to a later date.