Big win for Bruce Lehrmann in $200,000 court bid

Lisa Wilkinson and Channel 10 have lost a bid to demand Bruce Lehrmann pay a $200,000 security before appealing his defamation judgment.

Lisa Wilkinson and Channel 10 have lost a bid to force Bruce Lehrmann pay a $200,000 security before the Full Court hears his appeal against Justice Michael Lee’s judgment he raped Brittany Higgins.

Justice Wendy Abraham also ordered that an order for Mr Lehrmann to pay Ten $2 million in legal costs be stayed or put on hold until after the legal appeal is dealt with next year.

The decision means that the broadcaster and TV host face an estimated combined legal bill of up to $500,000 for the appeal alone.

The total cost of the defamation matter is estimated to be up to $5 million. However they only requested $2 million from Mr Lehrmann, which he has no capacity to pay.

Legal submissions have previously suggested Wilkinson would face appeal costs of $200,000 and Ten estimated costs of $275,000.

Earlier this year, Justice Michael Lee ordered that Mr Lehrmann must pay Ten and Wilkinson’s legal costs on an indemnity basis.

He accepted Ten’s submission that Mr Lehrmann proceeded with the defamation case, knowing Brittany Higgins’ rape claims were substantially true.

Mr Lehrmann, who relies on Centrelink payments, had previously made legal submissions that he had no method of raising the $200,000 security apart from “silly” ideas like OnlyFans.

Bruce Lehrmann won’t have to pay $2 million in legal costs, for now. Picture: Don Arnold/Getty Images

Lisa Wilkinson and Channel 10 lost the court bid. Picture: Supplied

In a written judgment, Justice Wendy Abraham said that it was important Mr Lehrmann was afforded the right of appeal despite his financial situation.

“As (Mr Lehrmann) essentially submitted, the finding against him is extremely serious,” she said.

“Ms Wilkinson described it as a finding of criminal conduct. The impact on him if he is denied that right is self-evident,” she said.

“That is the likely consequence of making the order the respondents seek. This is in a context of it being accepted there are arguable grounds of appeal.

“I am conscious that the respondents will incur costs should this appeal proceed which ,if any costs orders are made in their favour, will likely be unrecoverable.

“Nonetheless, I am not persuaded, given the considerations relevant to the particular facts and circumstances of this case, that an order for security ought to be made.

“ There is no dispute that Mr Lehrmann is on Centrelink benefits and is impecunious.”

Mr Lehrmann’s legal team also submitted that Channel Ten might make as much money through advertising in covering the trial as they would spend on defending it.

‘No winners’ in defamation litigation

The judgment followed Justice Lee’s findings that Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins on the balance of probabilities. However, he also raised concerns about the conduct of Ten as “far from reasonable”.

“There are no real winners in this litigation,’’ Justice Lee said. “The result is best characterised as the respondents (Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson) overcoming a misconceived claim in relation to a broadcast because they were able to prove at trial the substantial truth of what the contemporaneous material demonstrates.”

Mr Lehrmann’s criminal trial in Canberra was abandoned in 2022 with no findings against him and he maintains his innocence.

Mr Lehrmann then launched defamation proceedings that ended in Justice Lee finding on the balance of probabilities to the civil standard that the former Liberal staffer raped Brittany Higgins at Parliament House.

Network Ten insisted on $200,000 security

Network Ten then insisted the Centrelink recipient pay a $200,000 security ahead of any appeal, prompting Mr Lehrmann to ask the court to stay the costs order of $2m made by Justice Michael Lee in the defamation case, and rejected a demand from Ten for a security of costs order to proceed with the appeal.

Zali Burrows, Mr Lehrmann’s lawyer, told the Federal Court that her client was too “scared” to attend court since becoming “arguably Australia’s most hated man” and the publicity surrounding the defamation trial has “smashed” his mental health.

Bruce Lehrmann and solicitor Zali Burrows in Hobart. Picture: Elise Kaine

“I cannot imagine a worse type of defamation than being called a rapist,” Ms Burrows said.

“This application for security, of course, is pretty much a bullying tactic … (to) shut down this appeal because they know that my client will not be able to come up with $200,000.

“It’s a bit rich (Ten and Wilkinson) asking him to put up $200,000 when they are one of the contributors as to why he’s pretty much unemployable,” she said.

“The only shot he’d probably ever have in making money is by going on OnlyFans or something silly like that. But other than that, they know that he cannot come up with this.”

Ten’s barrister, Dr Matt Collins KC said Collins said elements of Mr Lehrmann’s appeal grounds are “faintly arguable” while others are “hopeless”.

“In our submission there’s nothing improper in a successful litigant (Ten) seeking to enforce a cost order made by this court, or seeking security for the cost of an appeal in respect of the enforcement of the bankruptcy,’’ he said.

“He’s had his day in court, he had a very expensive trial which was conducted in the full glare of the entire nation,” Collins said.

“He was very ably represented and his honour had made findings at the end of the day.”

Barrister Sue Chrysanthou SC argued that Mr Lehrmann “chose to enter the fray.

“He came to this court by choice,” Chrysanthou said.

“He came here pleading his first imputation as one of rape. He did so having escaped the criminal process.

“He chose to enter the fray. He walked over the line and asked this court, knowing the likelihood that my client in Network Ten would plead truth, he made that decision, and that’s a factor against the arguments that he would make on public interest.”

Court told Mr Lehrmann Australia’s most hated man

Mr Lehmann’s lawyer Zali Burrows told the court her client has been “smashed” by the experience, and should have the opportunity to appeal.

“Mr Lehrmann is arguably Australia’s most hated man. He will forever be labelled a rapist,” Ms Burrows said.

“The only way to make money would be to go on OnlyFans or something silly like that,” Ms Burrows said.

“I am seeking the court’s discretion and understanding to at least allow him to appeal.”

Lisa Wilkinson’s costs could now be as much as $2 million. Picture: Don Arnold/Getty Images

Lisa Wilkinson’s costs

Lisa Wilkinson chose to employ an independent legal team to represent her in the case amid tensions with her employee over the Logies speech.

She could have chosen to simply rely on Ten’s barrister Matthew Collins KC, but instead hired leading defamation barrister Sue Chrysanthou SC.

Her costs were worth more than $700,000 before the trial but are now expected to be as much as $2 million.

‘Bankruptcy’ a possibility for Bruce Lehrmann

During the costs hearing, Justice Lee raised the prospect that Mr Lehrmann will be unable to pay Ten’s legal costs and will be forced into bankruptcy.

Ten’s barrister Matt Collins KC raised concerns that much of the legal arguments were “academic” because Mr Lehrmann will not be able to pay the costs that are estimated to be between $5 million and $6 million.

“Alternatively, someone has to go and bankrupt Mr Lehrmann or do something like that,’’ Dr Collins said.

Mr Lehrmann’s original legal team previously evealed there was a no win-no fee agreement in place which means his lawyers will not get paid.

The total cost of the defamation trial could rise to $10 million in total.

But to date, Mr Lehrmann has never paid a dollar for his own legal team.

The only cost agreement was on a no win-no fee basis.

Originally published as Big win for Bruce Lehrmann in $200,000 court bid