This week, the High Court concluded that Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation lawsuit against Network Ten has failed completely. After years of legal proceedings, the outcome was notably anticlimactic, appearing among a list of nearly 40 other cases where special leave applications were denied.
This case initially captivated the nation due to its serious allegations of sexual assault occurring within Parliament House in Canberra. It is important to note that Mr. Lehrmann has consistently asserted his innocence throughout the ordeal.
However, the situation became complicated as two Federal Court rulings established, on the balance of probabilities, that he had raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in 2019 following a social outing with fellow Liberal staff members. With the High Court’s decision, Mr. Lehrmann has exhausted all avenues for appeal.
The public became aware of Brittany Higgins’s accusations nearly two years after the incident, following her interview on “The Project” in 2021 with journalist Lisa Wilkinson and a subsequent report by Samantha Maiden from News Limited. While Mr. Lehrmann was not initially named, he later claimed that he was identifiable from the media coverage.
Before he could pursue a defamation claim, Mr. Lehrmann was arrested and charged with rape. The criminal trial, which took place in October 2022, ultimately collapsed due to juror misconduct, but it was remarkable that the trial even commenced at all. Just before it began, Mr. Lehrmann lost his legal representation, necessitating a last-minute scramble for a new legal team.
The trial was further delayed after Ms. Wilkinson made comments during a Logies speech that the court determined could have influenced potential jurors. It was later revealed that Network Ten’s lawyers had approved her speech.
On the day the trial commenced, media attention was intense, as reporters were eager to catch their first glimpse of Mr. Lehrmann, who had remained out of the public eye since the charges were filed. Ultimately, the prosecution dropped the charges after the then-ACT director of public prosecutions, Shane Drumgold, stated that Ms. Higgins was too unwell to proceed with a retrial.
Fast forward to 2023, and court proceedings resumed in Sydney, with public interest in the case continuing to grow. Thousands tuned into the Federal Court’s YouTube channel, making it a popular viewing destination. Unlike during the criminal trial, Mr. Lehrmann took the stand to testify.
The trial featured a range of witnesses, including Ms. Higgins, her family, former colleagues, and Ms. Wilkinson, along with the production team from “The Project.” A lip reader was even employed to interpret conversations captured on CCTV between Mr. Lehrmann and Ms. Higgins while they were at the Dock bar with colleagues.
This trial unveiled previously unknown details, including Ms. Higgins receiving over $2 million in compensation from the government. Additionally, it was disclosed that Mr. Lehrmann had been provided a year’s lodging following an appearance on the Network 7 program “Spotlight.”
In April 2023, Justice Michael Lee was prepared to announce his decision, but on Easter Sunday, Network Ten submitted documents seeking to reopen the case with new testimony from former “Spotlight” producer Taylor Auerbach, who claimed to have acted as a “babysitter” for Mr. Lehrmann. Auerbach alleged that expenses incurred to secure Mr. Lehrmann’s interview included over $300 for a tomahawk steak, and he claimed that Network 7 reimbursed Mr. Lehrmann for expenditures related to illicit drugs and sex workers, allegations that Network 7 firmly denied.
Justice Lee’s judgment included a memorable remark: “Having escaped the lion’s den, Mr. Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat.” Although the judge acknowledged that Mr. Lehrmann had been defamed, he ruled that the allegations were true on the balance of probabilities.
During a subsequent hearing, Mr. Lehrmann’s legal team was asked to provide evidence regarding the funding for his case, but they could not produce any, as they had worked pro bono. Until now, Mr. Lehrmann’s ongoing appeals had prevented Network Ten from pursuing the $2 million in legal costs that the judge ordered him to pay.
He has been managing his appeals without a barrister, initially filing the first application on his own and later receiving assistance from lawyer Zali Burrows. The first appeal to the Federal Court resulted in an even more emphatic ruling: that he had, on the balance of probabilities, raped Ms. Higgins and that he was aware she was not consenting. The second appeal to the High Court yielded no response.
The future of this case remains uncertain. Its repercussions have been profound, particularly for Ms. Higgins. She expressed her relief on social media following the conclusion of the defamation case, stating that the High Court’s decision offered “a measure of finality to a long and painful chapter.”
