Lisa Wilkinson scores major win with Network 10 over legal fees battle
Lisa Wilkinson has scored a major win in a heated battle with Network 10 over the cost of a defamation lawsuit brought by Bruce Lehrmann.
Lisa Wilkinson has scored a major win in a heated battle with Network 10 over the cost of a defamation lawsuit brought by Bruce Lehrmann.
The journalist and Network 10 are being sued by Mr Lehrmann over an interview with Brittany Higgins on The Project, which he claims conveyed he raped Ms Higgins in Parliament House in 2019.
Mr Lehrmann has consistently denied the allegations, and pleaded not guilty to a criminal charge before his trial was abandoned due to juror misconduct in 2022.
Ms Wilkinson and Network 10 were in the Federal Court on Wednesday for a separate battle over the costs incurred during the weeks-long defamation trial.
Network 10 initially accepted it was liable for “reasonable” legal fees incurred by Ms Wilkinson during the suit, which amounted to more than $700,000 last year.
Her costs are now likely more than $1 million.
Network 10 subsequently refused to pay the costs after claiming it was unnecessary for Ms Wilkinson to obtain separate legal representation.
On Wednesday, Network Ten’s barrister Robert Dick SC conceded the network no longer believed her decision was unreasonable.
Ms Wilkinson’s lawyer, Michael Elliot SC, welcomed the announcement as a “vindication of (Ms Wilkinson’s) position”.
He said Network 10’s backdown was an “embarrassment” and accused the company of leading Ms Wilkinson on a “merry dance right back to where we started a year ago”.
Justice Lee determined it was clear Ms Wilkinson had “not acted unthinkingly” in engaging separate legal representation.
“It seems to me plain beyond peradventure in all circumstances it was reasonable for Ms Wilkinson to retain separate lawyers,” he said.
He ordered Network 10 to pay the legal fees accrued by its former star presenter in the defamation trial and the costs dispute.
The figure will be determined at a later date.
Ms Wilkinson did not comment as she left the court victorious on Wednesday afternoon.
Justice Lee indicated he will return a decision for Mr Lehrmann’s defamation trial in March or April.
‘Cadet’: Judge blasts Lisa’s Logies speech
Justice Lee said earlier in the day that a journalist with more than four decades of experience should have been able to see the potential risks of making a speech just days before a criminal trial.
Mr Lehrmann alleges the imputation of his guilt was exacerbated by Ms Wilkinson’s speech at the Logies, in which she praised Ms Higgins for her “unwavering courage”.
On Wednesday, Justice Lee said the risks of making the speech ought to have been obvious to a “cadet journalist”.
Ms Wilkinson has more than four decades of experience as a journalist.
However, her lawyer Sue Chrysanthou SC argued her client had never been a legal reporter and had to instead rely on the “forceful advice” of her employer’s legal team.
She said the decision to go ahead with the speech came after Ms Wilkinson had “no objection” from ACT Director of Public Prosecution Shane Drumgold and after consultation with Network 10’s experienced lawyers.
Justice Lee agreed it was “a very different scenario from self indulgently getting up and saying what’s on top of their head”, as he had initially thought.
“That’s how it was presented to the media for a year,” Ms Chrysanthou replied.
Ms Wilkinson has maintained she was asked by Network 10 to give the speech, and they had a significant role in drafting and approving the speech.
“My client acted reasonably in acting on the advice she was given and clearly did not act in an improper way, in an unjustified way,” Ms Chrysanthou said.
Ms Wilkinson is fighting for Network 10 to cover the costs incurred in the defamation lawsuit with Mr Lehrmann.
Justice Lee has indicated he hopes to deliver a decision about the legal fees on Wednesday afternoon.
‘Significant issues’ with Higgins’ $2.4m payout
Earlier, Justice Lee said there were “significant” issues with the credibility of Ms Higgins and her alleged sexual assailant Mr Lehrmann, including the former Liberal staffer’s account of her $2.4 million taxpayer-funded payout.
Both former political staffers fronted the court in December last year to give evidence in the defamation case Mr Lehrmann launched against Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson.
He claims an interview with Ms Higgins on The Project conveyed he raped her in Parliament House in 2019.
Mr Lehrmann has consistently denied the allegations, and pleaded not guilty to a criminal charge before his trial was abandoned due to juror misconduct in 2022.
Justice Lee has reserved his decision in the defamation case, but Ms Wilkinson and Network 10 have returned to the Federal Court for a related dispute over costs.
Network 10 initially accepted it was liable for legal fees incurred by Ms Wilkinson during the defamation suit, which are estimated to exceed $700,000.
However, it has since refused to pay the costs after claiming it was unreasonable for Ms Wilkinson to have obtained separate legal representation.
On Wednesday, Justice Michael Lee said there were “significant credit issues” with Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins.
“There are quite significant differences in the evidence they’ve given in court and a number of out of court representations,” he said.
The Federal Court Justice noted Ms Higgins’ testimony in the defamation trial differed from evidence given during a Commonwealth matter, which led to a $2.4 million payout.
During the hearing, he said Ms Higgins knew she was under obligation to tell the truth and gave “a warranty that what she was saying was the truth”.
“She accepted that she was inducing the Commonwealth to enter into the deed on the basis of the correctness of the representation she made,” Justice Lee said.
Ms Higgins told the court during the defamation trial the government admitted liability over the alleged rape, but the settlement deed tendered to the court stated it did not.
He asked the parties to make submissions about the credibility of witnesses in this case and in a related case about the costs incurred by Ms Wilkinson in defending herself from the defamation suit.
“Credit is particularly important in this case,” Justice Lee said.
He has reserved his decision about the defamation case.
‘Odd’: Judge quizzes Lisa’s Logies decision
Ms Wilkinson’s decision to make her now-infamous speech at the 2022 Logies has been labelled “odd” amid a heated defamation lawsuit.
Ms Wilkinson’s lawyer Sue Chrysanthou SC said her client was “always being careful” and had consulted Network 10’s lawyers for legal advice “from the time of the nomination” for a Logies award.
“Not only did she turn her mind to it, she was actually quite careful and prescient about raising it at the TV week interview (before the Logies),” Justice Lee said.
“Which makes, in my mind, the action of actually giving the speech, odd.”
He queried whether the journalist had felt “obliged” to give the speech because she had been asked to do so by her employer.
Ms Wilkinson has maintained Network 10 asked her to write the speech and approved it before her delivery.
Lawyer ‘overlooked’ Lisa’s name in Lehrmann lawsuit email
A senior lawyer acting for Network 10 claimed she accidentally “overlooked” Ms Wilkinson’s name in an email notification about a defamation lawsuit brought by Mr Lehrmann.
Marlia Saunders told the Federal Court she had been notified about the lawsuit against Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson in an email in February 2023.
However, she told the court she had “overlooked the words” that named Ms Wilkinson as a respondent in the filed proceedings.
On Tuesday, Ms Wilkinson told the court she learned she was being sued by Mr Lehrmann by reading an article in The Australian newspaper.
“I found out through the media I was being sued,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“No one … informed me at all.”
She said she was “gobsmacked” to learn Network 10’s legal team had not informed her.
“Is this true? I’m being sued?” the journalist wrote to the lawyers alongside a copy of the article.
Wilkinson ‘pleased’ with Ten after Logies speech
Ms Wilkinson was “pleased” with Network Ten’s response to the intense backlash to her now-infamous Logies speech about Ms Higgins, according to a senior lawyer for Network 10.
Marlia Saunders is a partner at Thomson Geer law firm, which advised Network 10 after the speech and the ensuing delay of Bruce Lehrmann’s criminal trial.
She claimed Ms Wilkinson relayed she was “very pleased” with the network’s approach after the speech.
Ms Wilkinson’s lawyer, Michael Elliot SC, asked her if she was aware his client said she was “expressing dissatisfaction” through the meeting.
“(Our) recollection differs in a lot of respects,” Ms Saunders said.
She noted she had “contemporaneous records” of the meeting, while Ms Wilkinson had written “her version” a week later.
On Tuesday, Ms Wilkinson told the court she felt “abandoned” by her employer Network 10 after the speech.
She said she “begged” Network 10 to publicise its role in creating and approving the now-infamous Logies speech she made in 2022, but they refused to do so due to legal privilege.
Lisa and Higgins ‘inextricably’ linked: lawyer
Ms Wilkinson and Ms Higgins were “inextricably intertwined” after an interview on The Project aired Ms Higgin’s rape allegations, a senior Network 10 lawyer has said.
Tasha Smithies fronted the Federal Court on Wednesday to give evidence.
The senior litigation lawyer had approved the now-infamous speech Ms Wilkinson made to the Logies in 2022 while accepting an award for the interview.
The speech, which was given just eight days before the trial of Mr Lehrmann, attracted intense criticism and caused a three-month delay in the criminal trial.
Ms Smithies agreed she reviewed the speech twice before the Logies and did not request any changes, highlight any risks, or suggest Ms Wilkinson should not give the speech.
“I felt the speech as drafted didn’t refer to the trial and didn’t refer to Ms Wilkinson’s evidence (in the criminal trial),” she said.
She said she believed it was necessary for the journalist to give the speech to maintain the consistency of her statements ahead of the trial.
“I still stand by the advice that was given,” Ms Smithies said.
She said there was a “clear and unequivocal” link between Ms Wilkinson and Ms Higgins after the interview on The Project in February 2022.
“It was my view that from the time after the broadcast of the story, Ms Wilkinson was inextricably intertwined with Ms Higgins,” the lawyer said
“I would say Ms Wilkinson became part of the story. That continued through the Justice March in 2021 … and that continued support.”
Ms Smithies continued to maintain she was “not embarrassed” by her role in the Logies speech and repeated to the court that she believed her advice was appropriate.