Date set for Bruce Lehrmann’s court appeal over defamation case

Bruce Lehrmann suffered a crushing defeat when a judge found, on a balance of probability, that he raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House. Now, his appeal will be heard before three judges.

Bruce Lehrmann’s court date for his defamation appeal has been slated for August. Picture: NCA NewsWire / David Swift

EXCLUSIVE: Bruce Lehrmann’s bid to overturn his defamation loss will be held over three days in August, before two male judges and one female.

Federal Court Justice Michael Lee found last year that Lehrmann, on a balance of probabilities, had raped his former colleague Brittany Higgins when they were staffers in Parliament House in 2019.

The case was dismissed and Lehrmann was ordered to cover $2m in costs.

An appeal was lodged to have the damning judgement overturned, with Lehrmann’s lawyer Zali Burrows claiming her client was denied procedural fairness due to some of Justice Lee’s findings.

This masthead can reveal the appeal has now been set down for three days, from August 20 to August 22.

The matter will be heard before Justice Craig Colvin, Justice Michael Wigney, and Justice Wendy Abraham who has presided over the case management hearings to date.

Bruce Lehrmann and solicitor Zali Burrows in Hobart. Picture: Elise Kaine

Lehrmann’s defamation action against Network Ten and TV host Lisa Wilkinson was heard between December 2023 and February 2024.

The matter was launched over an interview Wilkinson did with Ms Higgins on Ten’s program The Project in 2021, during which she claimed a male colleague raped her inside the former defence industry minister’s Parliament House office.

Lehrmann’s name was not mentioned in the broadcast, but he claimed he was identifiable as Ms Higgins’ rapist to friends and colleagues. In the judgement last April, Justice Lee found Lehrmann was identifiable in the broadcast, but he also found the rape allegations were true on a civil scale.

Lehrmann has always maintained his innocence.

In written submissions lodged ahead of the appeal, Ms Burrows pointed to alleged discrepancies between the way Network Ten and Ms Higgins described the assault, and Justice Lee’s findings. Specifically, she pointed to his finding in situations where there was no physical evidence, only one witness statement versus another.

The network’s case involved claims that Lehrmann knew Ms Higgins did not consent to sexual intercourse based on a number of factors, including that she repeatedly said ‘no’ and told him to stop, that she was crying, and was too intoxicated to give consent.

Ms Higgins also told the court that she said “no” during the assault.

Brittany Higgins leaves the Federal Court inn Sydney during Lehrmann’s defamation case, after giving evidence. Picture: NCA NewsWire

Justice Lee found there was an assault, but he also found that Ms Higgins did not say “no” at the time. That finding opposes the evidence given in court, according to the submissions.

“His Honour cannot find facts if those facts were not put to Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins was not asked to give a version of the rape that His Honour found,” Ms Burrows said.

“His Honour should have inferred that there was no evidence that Ms Higgins could give that would have assisted the version he found. His Honour should have instructed himself to reject any information in relation to the case he found that was not put to Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins.”

Ms Burrows also said the network advanced an argument for a violent rape, where Ms Higgins was injured, cried, and repeatedly told Lehrmann to stop. She also pointed out that Justice Lee dismissed a number of the violence-related claims.

Lisa Wilkinson, right, arrives at the Federal Court in Sydney with her barrister, Sue Chrysanthou SC, on the day Justice Lee handed down his judgement. Picture: Getty

“[Ms Higgins’] evidence also graphically describes a violent rape that included having an inability to scream like in a horror movie, audible slapping, rough, being pinned, Mr Lehrmann going fast, legs pinned open between the side of the couch and other pinned open, there was sweat, shock and couldn’t get herself up from the couch,” Ms Burrows said.

In the judgement, Justice Lee rejected claims that Lehrmann pinned Ms Higgins’ leg open and left a bruise, that she was trapped in a corner of the couch, and that he left her with her dress around her waist.

Ms Burrows said Justice Lee’s “fundamental error” was that he felt compelled to choose between whether Ms Higgins was raped or not, rather than failing to consider a third possibility where neither case was proven.

In further submissions lodged in court, Wilkinson urged the court to throw out Lehrmann’s appeal, insisting his grounds were “without merit” and that he suffered no unfairness.

“Given his emphatic denials of sexual intercourse or any similar intimate interaction whatsoever, there was no lack of fairness in not putting to Mr Lehrmann that he was reckless,” the submissions said.

Originally published as Date set for Bruce Lehrmann’s court appeal over defamation case