Dr Collins also argued against Bauer's submission that there should be a cap on damages. He said if there had been a cap, then his client could have brought multiple cases against Bauer based on each defamatory article.
"The plaintiff suffered the same damage whether she proceeded with with one proceeding or eight proceedings," he said.
Wilson's barrister also argued it was right for the trial judge to award his client damages for the loss of lucrative film contracts in the wake of the defamatory articles.
"[Wilson's evidence] wasn't just plausible and coherent, it was overwhelming."
Bauer is not challenging last year's finding that it defamed the Hollywood star. Instead, it is challenging the $4.56 million damages bill and arguing the payout is "manifestly excessive".
On Wednesday, Bauer Media's barrister Michael Wheelahan, QC, challenged Justice Dixon's finding that a cap on general damages didn't apply. He also challenged the finding that Wilson needed to be compensated for roles she claimed she lost in the wake of the defamatory articles, arguing there was not enough evidence to support this claim.
Bauer Media's general counsel Adrian Goss issued a statement yesterday, saying a number of major media organisations had united to support "a key point in Bauer's appeal".
"It is important for us today to revisit this decision on the quantum of damages, which also
has broader implications for the media industry," he said.
Outside court yesterday, Ms Wilson said her goal was to move on with the rebuilding of her career and to give the money away. "Even though they continue to fight me, I'm confident the Court of Appeal will make the right decision," she said.