Lisa Wilkinson taking expensive risk ‘going back for her hat’

A new legal battle looms for TV presenter Lisa Wilkinson in her bid to overturn adverse findings against her in the Bruce Lehrmann defamation case: who will pay for her latest courtroom foray?

Barrister Sue Chrysanthou KC, left, and Lisa Wilkinson outside the Federal Court in Sydney in April. Picture: AAP

Another battle looms for Lisa Wilkinson in her bid to overturn adverse findings against her by Justice Michael Lee in Bruce Lehrmann’s failed defamation case: who will pay for her latest legal foray?

The television presenter’s estranged employer, Network Ten, is already playing hardball on reimbursing the $1.8m in legal fees she racked up in defending the mammoth case with separate legal representation led by top defamation silk Sue Chrysanthou SC.

In April, following a trial believed to have cost at least $10m, Justice Lee found that, on the balance of probabilities Mr Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in 2019.

However, he also found that Ten and Wilkinson had failed in their defence of qualified privilege – that is, that they had failed to act fairly and reasonably in the preparation and aftermath of the story.

Now Wilkinson is seeking to overturn Justice Lee’s finding that her conduct in the ­Higgins story was improper and unjustifiable, claiming he made more than 50 errors in his judgment.

In a notice of contention filed with the Federal Court on Wednesday, Wilkinson claims Justice Lee made multiple errors both in his findings about her conduct and about the rape of Ms Higgins by Mr Lehrmann.

However, it is far from clear that Ten will be willing to fund the new case, with Ms Chrysanthou ­revealed last month to have billed Wilkinson $8000 for each full day in court, along with $800 an hour for preparation, conferences, advices and travelling time.

Solicitors from Gillis Delaney Lawyers also charged Wilkinson amounts running into hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Some defamation lawyers ­queried the wisdom of Wilkinson’s latest move, wondering whether – as Justice Lee observed of Mr Lehrmann – having won a ­substantial part of her case, ­Wilkinson might be making the mistake of “going back for her hat”.

The presenter risks the Full Court of the Federal Court upholding Justice Lee’s finding that she failed in her duty as a journalist to act fairly and reasonably.

Last month, when lawyers for Wilkinson and Ten returned to the Federal Court to determine how costs of the defence should be divided between the two, counsel for the former Project host claimed the broadcaster was showing an “ongoing reluctance” to her costs.

The dispute between Wilkinson and Ten arose after the presenter elected to hire separate representation for the Lehrmann defamation case.

After a successful cross-claim by Wilkinson, Ten earlier this year agreed to pay “reasonable” costs for her team, but says she should be liable for any “dupli­cative or wasteful” work by her legal team.

With the unemployed Mr Lehrmann unlikely to be able to foot even part of the estimated $10m cost of the case, Ten wants Wilkinson to pay for all ­aspects of the case where it wasn’t necessary for her to have separate representation.

The court has heard costs may have to be determined by an external referee tasked with examining the breakdown of invoices and deciding which party pays what, but Justice Lee said he hoped the extra expenses of that could be avoided.

He suggested that if “two sensible solicitors got into a room together, you should be able to go through with a yellow and blue highlighter and work out by reference to the yellow ones where there isn’t any dispute”.

Both parties have been ordered to come up with an agreement by the time the court meets again next Friday.