A US judge in 2012 awarded the damages against Linda Howard and her husband Russell after the woman claimed they subjected her to sexual servitude and human trafficking at the US embassy compound in Tokyo. The decision has since been enforced by a Victorian judge.

Known only as Jane Doe, the Ethiopian-born domestic worker said Mr Howard repeatedly raped and sexually assaulted her, that his wife was complicit in the abuse and that the couple used isolation and threats of deportation to coerce her into servitude.

The US judge found the Howards limited Ms Doe's "contact with the outside world and verbally, physically and mentally abused her".

Judge Liam O'Grady said the crimes of sexual assault, forced labour and trafficking were "particularly grave" and fixed total damages at $US3.3 million ($4.8 million) after Ms Doe's civil action.

Mr Howard — who has since died — did not contest the woman's claim. Although his wife disputed it, she failed to comply with court orders and left the US without notice in May 2012 and did not participate further in the case.

The law firm Salvos Legal Humanitarian — a pro-bono practice owned by the Salvation Army whose work includes major human rights issues — was engaged by Ms Doe's US attorneys to seek the rare application to have the US judgement entered against Mrs Howard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

In March this year, Justice Jack Forrest ruled, after a contested trial, that judgement be entered in Ms Doe's favour and that the US judgement be entered against Mrs Howard in the Supreme Court.

Justice Forrest's view was that Mrs Howard's attempt to "reopen" the US judgment in his court was an abuse of process and it was "opportunistic in the extreme" for her, after "two years of silence", to assert she was denied the "choice of a trial on the merits".

Following Justice Forrest's ruling, and after what Fairfax Media understands was intense mediation between the parties, Jane Doe informed the Supreme Court that she had received in full a settlement sum from Mrs Howard.

In her recent orders, Justice Rita Zammit recorded that the judgement against Mrs Howard had been satisfied by the payment, which is believed to have been a seven-figure sum in the confidential resolution.

The action in Victoria began after Ms Doe's lawyers learnt that Mrs Howard, a former US state department employee and an American citizen, was living in Melbourne with her new husband.

In an affidavit for the Victorian case, Mrs Howard said she and Jane Doe had a close "mother-daughter" relationship and she had made every effort to provide her a comfortable and "culturally sensitive environment".

She said Jane Doe was never held involuntarily, her claims of forced sexual servitude were fabricated and claimed the US default judgment was obtained by Jane Doe's fraud.

Justice Forrest found that Mrs Howard's failure to take any steps to set aside the US judgment "has not been the subject of any satisfactory explanation".

A lawyer for Mrs Howard would not comment.