Bruce Lehrmann case: Lisa Wilkinson seeking $1.8m from Network Ten

Lisa Wilkinson wants costs from the network after its defamation case against former Liberal staffer Bruce Lehrmann, a court has heard.

Network Ten host Lisa Wilkinson. Picture: NCA Newswire / Gaye Gerard

Lisa Wilkinson is seeking more than $1.8 million from Network 10 in the fallout of their defamation case against former Liberal staffer Bruce Lehrmann, a court has heard, as the broadcaster shows an “ongoing reluctance” to pay the high profile presenter’s legal costs.

Lawyers for Wilkinson and Ten returned to court on Monday morning to determine how costs of the defence should be divided between the two respondents, after Wilkinson hired a separate legal team to defend her in the mammoth defamation matter brought by Mr Lehrmann.

Justice Michael Lee, in presiding over the costs hearing, revealed Wilkinson will seek an indemnity in respect of $1,815,000 inclusive of GST. “Give or take a few cents,” he said.

The long-awaited judgment of the matter was handed down last month, finding Ten and Wilkinson successfully made out their truth defence and proved, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins in the office of Liberal senator Linda Reynolds.

Bruce Lehrmann outside court in April. Picture: Getty Images

However, Justice Lee found the network failed to make out its qualified privilege defence and acted unreasonably in its treatment of Mr Lehrmann when airing an interview on The Project with Ms Higgins, in which she detailed her rape allegations but did not name Mr Lehrmann as her attacker.

Justice Lee earlier this month ordered Mr Lehrmann to pay Ten and Wilkinson’s costs on an indemnity basis – covering about 90 per cent of its legal bill – in relation to its successful truth defence. In relation to the failed qualified privilege defence, he instructed Mr Lehrmann to pay the broadcasters on an ordinary basis – about 70 per cent of its legal bill.

Wilkinson and Ten’s costs dispute

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

After a successful cross-claim by Wilkinson, Ten earlier this year agreed to pay “reasonable” costs for her team, led by top defamation silk Sue Chrysanthou SC, but says that The Project host should be liable for any “duplicative or wasteful” work by her legal team.

With the jobless Mr Lehrmann unlikely to be able to foot even a fraction of the estimated $10m cost of the case, Ten wants its former star presenter to pay for all aspects of the case where it wasn’t necessary for her to have separate representation.

“There’s an ongoing reluctance to pay us anything,” Wilkinson’s barrister, Michael Elliot SC, told the court on Monday.

The court has previously heard costs will be determined by an external referee tasking with examining the breakdown of invoices and deciding which party pays what.

Ten’s barrister Zoe Graus on Monday told the court there were issues relating to the clarity in which Wilkinson is seeking costs.

“There are certainly costs which we do not dispute are recoverable by Ms Wilkinson. It’s more a matter of being able to identify those costs on a line item basis,” she said.

“For example, ideally costs line items which specifically said ‘Ms Wilkinson’s solicitors were reviewing the evidence prepared by my clients in respect of the truth defence, for the purpose of assessing Ms Wilkinsons legal rights’ - that would be one matter. Then, if there was a separate line item indicating the active involvement by Ms Wilkinson on the cost on the truth defence that would be another matter.”

But Justice Lee said Wilkinson’s invoices told a “relatively detailed narrative”.

“I really do think 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, and ... I can enter amount in respect to that which will go off to the referee, and it would also help me crystallise the questions that I might need to determine as a question of law which are apt to be determined by me rather than the referee,” he said.

Justice Lee also told the court on Monday he was considering making a lump-sum costs order payable by Mr Lehrmann, saying Ten might be “throwing good money after bad” in going through the referee process.

He said he did not wish to engage in “undue speculation” but accepted there were “limited prospects of recovery” of any costs from Mr Lehrmann.

Ms Graus agreed it would be “simply premature” to send the matter to a referee.

Justice Lee ordered Wilkinson’s lawyers to file any addition material in relation to her indemnity claim by June 21.

Ten should, by the same date, serve any material they rely upon to seek a lump sum costs order, Justice Lee instructed.

Bruce Lehrmann’s appeal

Mr Lehrmann was last month given an extension until May 31 to file an appeal against Justice Lee’s verdict.

Appeals silk Guy Reynolds SC is leading a new team for a potential appeal of the landmark judgment, which found Ten and Wilkinson did not defame Mr Lehrmann when interviewing Ms Higgins on The Project in early 2021.

Criminal defence barrister Margaret Cunneen SC is also rumoured to have offered to lend her services to Mr Reynolds, due to extensive experience with sexual assault trials, most recently winning a case for ex-Wallaby Kurtley Beale.