UPDATE 2.30PM:

Victorian Supreme Court Justice John Dixon will hear submissions regarding damages on Monday after actress Rebel Wilson won her month-long defamation case against Bauer Media.

A six-woman jury on Thursday afternoon returned a verdict overwhelmingly in the actor’s favour against the “bully” tabloid magazine publisher.

Shine Lawyers defamation law principal Peter Coggins told AAP on Friday that general damages in Australia were capped at about $380,000 despite media reports suggesting Wilson’s damages payout would be in the millions of dollars.

He said Wilson could potentially win much more if she proves special damages for lost earnings, but she would need some “pretty strong evidence” and it would be a “complex case” to run.

“She’s come out publicly and said it’s not about the damages, but certainly I expect her lawyers are going to mount a case for some sort of special damages award,” Mr Coggins said.

Mr Coggins described Wilson’s court battle as a “watershed” case in Melbourne, which would set a precedent for future defamation trials.

Wilson, 37, sued Bauer – the publisher of Woman’s Day, Australian Women’s Weekly, NW and OK magazine – over eight articles in 2015 that claimed she was a serial liar and told “pork pies” about her real name, age and childhood to make it in Hollywood.

Wilson and barrister Matthew Collins QC were able to prove that Wilson had not lied to journalists and that the articles had caused her harm.

They were also able to prove the first of the articles, written by Woman’s Day journalist Shari Nementzik, was malicious in its intent.

Wilson and Dr Collins, however, have claimed the case was not about money but about restoring the Pitch Perfect and Bridesmaids star’s reputation and removing the “stain”.

“There was so much mud slung at me throughout the case, just a ridiculous amount, and I had to sit there and cop it,” Wilson said outside court.

“I know my life story, I’ve lived it, I’m proud of it and had nothing to hide.”

Wilson could be awarded millions of dollars if special damages are awarded, but according to Melbourne media lawyer Justin Quill, the sum is likely to be $250,000.

“My guess is $250,000, plus all costs, no special damages,” he told 3AW on Friday morning.

The star joked that she got through the stress of her case by thinking about her movie, in which she will get to “pash” fellow Australian star export Liam Hemsworth.

However, Bauer Media denied the articles had damaged Wilson’s reputation and argued that, in any case, they were based in fact.

Woman’s Day journalist denies ‘hatchet job’

Woman’s Day was the first of the publisher’s magazines to allege Wilson had lied publicly about aspects of her life, including her age and real name.

One of the magazine’s former journalists, Shari Nementzik, denied doing a “hatchet job” on the actress’s reputation.

She said she had based the article on a source who had commented on the magazine’s website in 2012, claiming she had gone to high school with the actress and “what a lier [sic] she has become!!”

The identity of the source, who was paid $2000, was not revealed to the court.

Nementzik told the court she did not think her source was “completely unreliable”, and denied publishing information she knew was false. She also denied breaching the code of ethics by leaving out relevant facts and not giving Wilson an opportunity to respond.

Earlier in the trial, Wilson said magazines such as Woman’s Day were known for wanting to publish exposés on celebrities because they sold more copies than “puff pieces”.

“They’re hungry at this point to write anything at all negative about me … here’s one little comment on a story and they’re kind of like vultures swooping in to contact this person,” she said.

Wilson told the jury she believed the source was a disgruntled former classmate who was jealous of her success.

But Nementzik denied the article was a mean story from a source “with an axe to grind”.

“I was just doing my job,” she said.