Lehrmann, who has been involved in a defamation case against Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, may not have the funds to bring an appeal following the recent court decision. War veteran Ben Roberts-Smith agreed to pay nearly $1 million as security to cover the legal costs of Nine newspapers in case he loses his appeal against his own defamation loss. The Full Court of the Federal Court has yet to deliver its judgment on Lehrmann’s appeal, and Ten and Wilkinson may also seek security for costs from Lehrmann if he decides to lodge an appeal.
The defamation case centers around Lehrmann’s allegations that Ten and Wilkinson defamed him by suggesting he was guilty of raping his former colleague, Higgins, in the office of Linda Reynolds, where they both worked as advisers. Lehrmann has consistently maintained his innocence. The main defense put forward by Ten and Wilkinson was based on the truth, which was upheld by the court. The judge found, by the civil standard of proof, that Lehrmann did rape Higgins and acted in a wrongful manner towards her. Despite not being convicted in a criminal trial, Lehrmann has been found liable for the offense in the civil case.
During the defamation case, a significant amount of time was spent on Ten and Wilkinson’s defense of qualified privilege, which relates to publications of public interest where media companies and journalists can show they acted reasonably. The court found that this defense would not have been established if required. Lehrmann’s barrister argued that he should be compensated for the costs incurred in establishing that the qualified privilege defenses were bound to fail. However, the court may award costs on an indemnity basis, similar to the Roberts-Smith case. Ten’s barristers maintained that the mere fact of being unsuccessful on some issues does not automatically displace the rule on costs, and qualified privilege was not always doomed to fail.
Lehrmann’s criminal trial for Higgins’ sexual assault was aborted due to juror misconduct, and he did not stand trial for a second time due to concerns about Higgins’ mental health. Despite not being convicted in a criminal trial, the civil court found Lehrmann guilty of raping Higgins to the balance of probabilities standard. This has led to significant legal battles, with parties like Ten and Wilkinson seeking security for costs in case of an appeal. The outcome of the appeal and any potential further legal actions will determine the final resolution of the defamation case, as well as the financial implications for all parties involved.
In conclusion, the defamation case between Lehrmann and Ten/Wilkinson has brought to light complex legal issues surrounding truth defenses, qualified privilege, and potential appeals. The central allegations of rape and wrongful behavior towards Higgins have been a focal point of the case, with conflicting standards of proof between the criminal and civil courts. The financial aspects, including the security for costs and possible indemnity awards, add another layer of complexity to the already contentious legal battle. The final judgment by the Full Court of the Federal Court will ultimately determine the outcome of the appeal and any further legal actions in this ongoing case.
