Call to Labor to release ‘all correspondence’ on Brittany Higgins’ $2.4m payout
The opposition says the Albanese government must explain how and why it came to pay Brittany Higgins $2.4m, leaving former Liberal minister Linda Reynolds fighting to rebut the former staffer’s claims.
The federal opposition says the Albanese Labor government must explain how and why it came to pay Brittany Higgins $2.4m, after a secret trove of documents lifted the lid on the government’s manoeuvring to provide her with the settlement.
The secrecy around that payout, which followed a one-day mediation, ensured former Liberal minister Linda Reynolds would be unable to defend herself against the former staffer’s claims, Ms Reynolds alleges.
The trove of documents hidden from Ms Reynolds in the lead-up to settlement was discovered during her defamation case against Ms Higgins in the WA Supreme Court, in which Justice Paul Tottle awarded the ex-senator more than $340,000 in damages and interest.
Shadow attorney-general Andrew Wallace on Friday said the revelations in The Australian raised serious questions about the conduct of the Attorney-General’s department, and called on Michelle Rowland to release all relevant correspondence to explain how decisions to award the settlement were made.
“The public deserves to know what happened, why it happened, and how it happened,” Mr Wallace said.
The cache of documents revealed the commonwealth’s lawyers, purportedly acting on Ms Reynolds’ behalf, after forcibly taking control of her defence, effectively give Ms Higgins an extension of time to commence her claim – which Ms Reynolds alleges was against her instructions and done without telling her.
Ms Higgins’ lawyers then provided the commonwealth with new claims against Ms Reynolds and “an increased quantum proposed for settlement”, none of which the former senator was told about.
“Every Australian has the right to expect that the commonwealth conducts itself as a model litigant. That means acting with fairness, transparency and integrity, especially when spending taxpayers’ money,” Mr Wallace said.
“What has been reported yesterday suggests a settlement process that was rushed, opaque, and kept hidden from those directly affected. If the commonwealth took steps without proper disclosure or acted in a way that prevented a named party from defending their reputation, that is a matter of profound concern.”
Justice Tottle in the defamation case found Ms Higgins had made objectively false statements to bolster an untrue claim of a political cover-up of her rape allegation.
That verdict followed a judgment by Federal Court judge Michael Lee, in the defamation case brought by Bruce Lehrmann, that Ms Higgins had, on the balance of probabilities, been raped by Mr Lehrmann, but that her claims of mistreatment by Ms Reynolds were false.
Justice Tottle gave Ms Reynolds permission to use the subpoenaed documents in her legal case against the commonwealth and its lawyers, HWL Ebsworth, finding it was entirely reasonable for her “to question the process by which the settlement had been achieved”.
Ms Reynolds alleges the commonwealth and the law firm were in breach of their duty to act in her best interests when they settled Ms Higgins’ claim after a one-day mediation from which the senator was excluded by then-attorney-general Mark Dreyfus.
On Wednesday Ms Reynolds filed an amended statement of claim in her case against the commonwealth and HWL Ebsworth. It is understood that the commonwealth demanded that a reference to Senator Penny Wong and Senator Katy Gallagher be removed from the new statement of claim.
“Transparency is not optional. When taxpayers fund a settlement of $2.4 million, and when serious claims are being made about withheld documents, waived limitation periods and excluded parties, the Attorney-General has an obligation to clear the air,” Mr Wallace said.
More Coverage
