Judgment day finally announced for epic Bruce Lehrmann, Ten, Lisa Wilkinson defamation saga

Justice Michael Lee will deliver his verdict on Monday, the timing suggesting evidence produced by Taylor Auerbach has not significantly affected the judgment already largely written.

The Federal Court will rule on Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation case against Network 10 and Lisa Wilkinson on Monday.

Bruce Lehrmann will learn on Monday next week whether judge Michael Lee has found he was defamed by Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson when they aired an interview with alleged rape victim Brittany Higgins.

On Tuesday, the Federal Court advised that Justice Lee would deliver his verdict at 10.15am next Monday, with the judge expected to read an abbreviated version of his judgment, live-streamed on the Federal Court’s YouTube channel, with longer reasons to be published in full on the court’s website at the conclusion.

The judgment had been delayed by an 11th-hour intervention last week by disaffected former Seven producer Taylor Auerbach, who provided Ten with affidavits about Mr Lehrmann’s involvement with the Seven network.

Mr Lehrmann sued Ten and Wilkinson over her interview with Ms Higgins on The Project in 2021, detailing accu­sations that Mr Lehrmann had raped Ms Higgins but not naming him as the alleged attacker.

Ten and Wilkinson have relied on a defence of truth, in an attempt to prove Mr Lehrmann sexually assaulted Ms Higgins on the couch of senator Linda Reynolds in Parliament House in the early hours of March 23, 2019.

Mr Lehrmann has consistently denied raping Ms Higgins.

The judgment was due to be delivered last Thursday but was postponed when the Ten Network successfully sought to reopen the case citing fresh evidence from Auerbach about expensive perks provided to Mr Lehrmann while Seven’s Spotlight program was trying to convince him to hand over his exclusive interview rights.

Taylor Auerbach leaves the Federal Court on Friday. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Nikki Short

Auerbach gave evidence last week that Seven reimbursed Mr Lehrmann for sex workers and illegal drugs after the former ­Liberal staffer had been on a “bender”, and admitted to charging his Seven-issued corporate card with thousands of dollars for Thai massages for himself and Mr Lehrmann.

Auerbach also claims Mr Lehrmann provided Spotlight with confidential information from his criminal rape trial as part of his interview deal. Mr Lehrmann has denied giving the program such information.

Justice Lee on Friday described Auerbach as “a man who wants to do as much damage to his previous employer as he could conceivably do” and questioned Ten lawyers about the relevance of the new evidence.

The judge clarified that “doesn’t mean he’s not a truth-teller”.

“But don’t put him up as some sort of notable public-interested person who was coming along to get something off his chest, because he thought he had to assist His Majesty’s justices,” Justice Lee said. “He’s a man who wanted to make a range of allegations against people under absolute privilege.”

In a submission released by the court on Tuesday, Mr Auerbach rejected claims his allegations were “motivated by vengeance or other ill will towards Seven”, saying none of his evidence has been demonstrated to be false.

His admitted “hatred” of former Seven colleague Steve Jackson was “irrelevant to whether the content of his affidavits are true, given he says nothing critical of Mr Jackson in those affidavits”, Mr Auerbach’s lawyer submitted.

The announcement of a verdict on Monday suggests the evidence produced by the 32-year-old, while damaging for his former colleagues at Seven, has not significantly affected the judgment that had already been largely written by Justice Lee, though it may impact any damages awarded.

Lisa Wilkinson arrives at the Federal Court on Friday. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Nikki Short

Justice Lee must decide whether, on the balance of probabilities, Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins. If he finds the rape did occur, Network Ten and Wilkinson would claim victory, and would seek to have Lehrmann pay their substantial legal costs – likely to run into many millions.

If Justice Lee finds on the balance of probabilities, that no sexual contact occurred between the two – as Mr Lehrmann testified – and he did not rape Brittany Higgins, he must decide how much compensation or damages Mr Lehrmann should be paid by Wilkinson and Ten.

If Justice Lee finds the pair did have sex, but it was consensual, or that Mr Lehrmann did not understand Ms Higgins was not consenting, that means he would effectively have found Mr Lehrmann to be a liar.

Ten has argued in this case, the damages should only be a nominal amount such as $1, because they say Mr Lehrmann has lied at various times throughout this saga.

Ten and Wilkinson also have a second defence of qualified privilege, arguing Wilkinson and The Project production team properly fulfilled their obligations in preparing the story.

Justice Lee must consider this as a “reasonableness” defence: that is, was it reasonable to publish the allegations, even if the judge does not find them to be true? This will turn on all the efforts Ten and Wilkinson made (or did not make) to establish the truth of Higgins’ claims.

If Justice Lee finds Ten and Wilkinson were reasonable, this could either reduce the amount of damages Mr Lehrmann is awarded if the truth defence fails, or it could mean an outright victory for Ten and Wilkinson.