Choice of silk sees Lisa Wilkinson’s ties to Ten turn toxic

Legal sources suggest the network’s ­refusal to pay her legal bills in the defamation case brought by Bruce Lehrmann stems in part from ill-feeling towards the barrister she chose, Sue Chrysanthou SC.

Project host Lisa Wilkinson. Picture: Getty Images

The split between Lisa Wilkinson and Channel 10 is becoming ­increasingly toxic, with legal sources suggesting the network’s ­refusal to pay her legal bills in the defamation case brought by Bruce Lehrmann stems in part from ill-feeling towards the barrister she chose, Sue Chrysanthou SC.

The Project host is believed to have hired her own legal team ­because she felt the network was more interested in defending itself than her.

The Weekend Australian understands Wilkinson’s concerns began when Ten retained leading defamation expert Matthew Collins KC, who had called her Logies speech “ill-advised” on breakfast television, on the morning after the awards.

Sue Chrysanthou. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Adam Yip

The network hired Dr Collins – without her knowledge or input – just hours after he appeared on Seven’s Sunrise program saying her comments had the “tendency to interfere with the administration of justice”. “Now that’s an unusual situation, but that’s where she found herself when she was sued,” said a source. “That she was not being given any choice as to who the lawyers were or who the barristers were”

“If Justice Lee (presiding over the defamation case) were to say ‘Dr Collins, Ms Wilkinson has been accused of terrible conduct which aggravates damage because of her Logies speech – what do you have to say about that?’ And he says, ‘Oh, no. Well, I don’t think it’s improper conduct’ … isn’t the judge entitled to say ‘well, you actually called it ill-advised the following day?’”

Bruce Lehrmann. Picture: 7 NEWS

When Mr Lehrmann launched his defamation action, Wilkinson hired Ms Chrysanthou and Gillis Delaney Lawyers partner Anthony Jefferies to defend her, and in doing so opted out of using law firm Thomson Geer, which Network 10 has on retainer. In a suit filed to the NSW ­Supreme Court, Wilkinson claims Ten is unlawfully refusing to pay legal bills totalling more than $700,000.

Legal sources claimed there was “open hostility” from Ten’s in-house legal team towards Ms Chrysanthou. The network first told the presenter she shouldn’t be represented by anyone but its own lawyers and that it wasn’t bound to pay for her separate representation.

When Wilkinson warned Ten she would file a cross claim against it in the Lehrmann case, the network obtained advice from Bret Walker SC, after which it agreed it was liable to indemnify Wilkinson against an award of damages or costs and for “reasonable legal costs”. However, law firm Baker & McKenzie, on behalf of Ten, then claimed Wilkinson’s lawyers had performed “substantial unnecessary work”.

Wilkinson quit The Project in November last year, calling out the “targeted toxicity” of media scrutiny she had encountered following an interview with Brittany Higgins and the subsequent ­Logies speech.

Friends say the network failed to come to her defence in the wake of claims by the ACT’s then-chief prosecutor, Shane Drumgold, that he had warned her of the dangers of giving the speech.

They say Ten did not want Wilkinson to give evidence at the Sofronoff Inquiry, which ultimately found Mr Drumgold “knowingly lied” to the Supreme Court over his purported warning.

“I mean, you didn’t see Channel 10 racing down to Canberra to participate in the Sofronoff Inquiry to defend her – that’s something she had to do off her own back,” the friend said.

The Logies speech may become part of the defamation case if Mr Lehrmann relies on it to receive aggravated damages.