Latest / The Front / Can Bruce Lehrmann find millions for Ten’s legal fees?

Transcript

Can Bruce Lehrmann find millions for Ten’s legal fees? · The Front

0:04
Speaker 1: From The Australian. I'm Claire Harvey. A special bonus episode
0:07
Speaker 1: of The Front for You Today, Bruce Lamon has been
0:13
Speaker 1: ordered to pay the vast majority of Network ten and
0:16
Speaker 1: Lisa Wilkinson's whopping costs after unsuccessfully suing them for defamation.
0:21
Speaker 1: Just as Michael Lee said Ten's journalism was unreasonable and unjustifiable,
0:27
Speaker 1: but he slated Lahman's lies and his decision to have
0:31
Speaker 1: his lawyers cross examine a rape victim knowing she was
0:35
Speaker 1: telling the truth. In today's episode, Wylee is still furious
0:39
Speaker 1: with the Network ten and what he says about Brittany
0:42
Speaker 1: higgins conduct.
0:54
Speaker 2: Mister Lhermon had sexual intercourse with Miss Higgins and yet
0:57
Speaker 2: ran a primary case premised upon the fanciful, knowingly false
1:00
Speaker 2: premiss that in the early hours of twenty three March
1:03
Speaker 2: twenty nineteen, he was preoccupied with noting up details as
1:06
Speaker 2: to French submarine contracts.
1:09
Speaker 1: This is justice, Michael Lee delivering what he says he
1:12
Speaker 1: hopes are some of his final words on the matter
1:15
Speaker 1: that has gripped Australia over four years, the claim that
1:19
Speaker 1: Bruce Lehman raped Brittany Higgins on a sofa in Federal
1:23
Speaker 1: Parliament House.
1:25
Speaker 2: As I said, mister Lehman defended the criminal charge on
1:28
Speaker 2: a false basis, lied to police, and then allowed that
1:30
Speaker 2: lie to go uncorrected before the jury. He wrongly instructed
1:34
Speaker 2: his senior council to cross examine a complaint of sexual assault,
1:37
Speaker 2: then two legal proceedings, including relevantly for present purposes in
1:41
Speaker 2: this case, on a knowingly false premiss Indeed, this was
1:45
Speaker 2: misconduct in the running of the case of such a
1:47
Speaker 2: character that even if I had not reached the level
1:49
Speaker 2: of satisfaction that mister Lehman raped Miss Higgins, and mister
1:52
Speaker 2: Lehman was therefore entitled to judgment of twenty thousand dollars
1:55
Speaker 2: in the count of factual explained in the judgment, I
1:58
Speaker 2: would have declined to award costs in mister Lurman's favor.
2:01
Speaker 2: This would have been the appropriate exercise of discretion in
2:03
Speaker 2: circumstances given mister Lehman had acted in serious breach of
2:08
Speaker 2: his unbl obligations under Part five B the Federal Court
2:11
Speaker 2: of Australia Act in advancing a case he knew was
2:13
Speaker 2: false and which occasion much delay, in efficiency and increased cost.
2:18
Speaker 1: The judge has already found on the balance of probabilities
2:21
Speaker 1: that Laerman did rape Higgins. Lareman's indicated he may appeal,
2:26
Speaker 1: but now he's facing an immense legal bill because the
2:29
Speaker 1: federal court judge has ordered him to hand Network ten
2:33
Speaker 1: and its journalist Lisa Wilkinson what's likely to be millions
2:36
Speaker 1: of dollars to pay their lawyers. Lahman's own lawyers up
2:41
Speaker 1: till now have been working on a no win, no
2:43
Speaker 1: fee basis and won't get paid because they lost the
2:48
Speaker 1: lawyers earlier this week told the court Laerman does not
2:51
Speaker 1: have a secret financial backer out there paying his bills.
2:55
Speaker 1: He likely does not have millions of dollars lying around.
2:59
Speaker 1: This decision may bankrupt him, and given he now has
3:02
Speaker 1: new lawyers who may not be working no win, no fee,
3:06
Speaker 1: it could make an appeal less likely.
3:12
Speaker 2: There are no real winners in this litigation.
3:15
Speaker 1: Something that's been grinding Michael Lee's gears about the epic
3:19
Speaker 1: legal storm surrounding Laman and Higgins is the way he says,
3:23
Speaker 1: everyone only hears what they want to hear with.
3:27
Speaker 2: The predictability of an atomic clock. Partisans have focused solely
3:31
Speaker 2: on those parts of the judgment that happened to align
3:33
Speaker 2: with preconceived notions, but their reality of mixed findings has
3:37
Speaker 2: been somewhat obscured in the public statements of the respondents
3:40
Speaker 2: and their submissions as to costs, which advanced an assertion
3:43
Speaker 2: that they won the litigation and that costs should axiomatically
3:47
Speaker 2: follow the event.
3:48
Speaker 1: Here's what he means. Ten won the case, Yes, but
3:52
Speaker 1: it wasn't a total win, and they shouldn't assume they
3:55
Speaker 1: get to force Bruce Lamon to pay all their legal costs.
4:02
Speaker 1: Bruce Lambon sued Network ten and presenter Lisa Wilkinson over
4:06
Speaker 1: the Bombshell twenty twenty one story on the project, in
4:09
Speaker 1: which Rittney Higgins told her emotional story of being raped
4:13
Speaker 1: by Bruce Lammon and then despairing as as she claimed
4:17
Speaker 1: her bosses failed to act, and.
4:20
Speaker 3: So I would, I would try and raise it, and
4:23
Speaker 3: I would try and bring it up. Then it was
4:25
Speaker 3: always it always sort of came back to sort of
4:27
Speaker 3: being a mere issue and it says, so you can't
4:30
Speaker 3: deal with it, then you can leave.
4:33
Speaker 1: Lamman said he never had sex of any kind with Higgins,
4:35
Speaker 1: and that when the pair came back to Parliament House
4:38
Speaker 1: one autumn night in twenty nineteen after a big night
4:41
Speaker 1: of drinking. He went to his desk and made some
4:43
Speaker 1: notes about French submarine contracts.
4:47
Speaker 2: Oh, Bruce Lareman here with Minister Linda Reynolds to then
4:50
Speaker 2: request to pick up some documents.
4:53
Speaker 1: Have I've forgotten my past? Ten and Wilkinson had two defenses,
4:59
Speaker 1: First that Britney Higgins's claim of being raped was true,
5:03
Speaker 1: and second that their story was covered by statutory qualified privilege.
5:08
Speaker 1: That's a rule designed to protect well intentioned, careful journalism.
5:13
Speaker 1: The qualified privilege defense means a publisher has to prove
5:16
Speaker 1: that they made all reasonable efforts to ensure the publication
5:20
Speaker 1: was true. In his judgment back in April, Justice Lee
5:24
Speaker 1: found Ten and Wilkinson had successfully proven the truth of
5:28
Speaker 1: the rape on the balance of probabilities, which is the
5:31
Speaker 1: standard in civil cases like this, but he said Ten
5:35
Speaker 1: had failed on the qualified privileged defense.
5:39
Speaker 2: First, I explained why the conduct of both Network ten
5:42
Speaker 2: and miss Wilkinson in publishing the project program its character
5:46
Speaker 2: of to feign that defamatory imputations as to mister Lihman
5:49
Speaker 2: was unreasonable. Contrary to assertions of Network ten, the examination
5:53
Speaker 2: of the respondent's conduct was not devoid of, nor divorce
5:56
Speaker 2: from reality, nor did it involve picking a part in
6:00
Speaker 2: secting the respondent's conduct by reference to a standard of perfection.
6:04
Speaker 2: For anyone taking the trouble to read the judgment would
6:07
Speaker 2: conclude that I did not consider the evatagey assessment required
6:10
Speaker 2: by the statutory qualified privileged defense to be a close
6:14
Speaker 2: run thing.
6:16
Speaker 1: That there is a big swipe at Network ten over
6:19
Speaker 1: something else that has made the judge very cranky. The
6:22
Speaker 1: statements made on the court steps and in media interviews
6:25
Speaker 1: after the trial by a representative of ten's law firm
6:30
Speaker 1: in terms.
6:30
Speaker 4: Of Channel ten's reasonable us look the way in which
6:34
Speaker 4: judges and barristers, and this is the problem with defamation
6:37
Speaker 4: law in Australia. The way in which judges and barristers
6:40
Speaker 4: pick apart and dissect what journalists did or didn't do
6:44
Speaker 4: in applying a legal threshold or legal test of reasonable
6:49
Speaker 4: was is quite often divorced from reality.
6:53
Speaker 1: The judge went on.
6:54
Speaker 2: I also explained that although the respondents legally justified their
6:58
Speaker 2: imputation of rape, their conduct was not justifiable in any
7:02
Speaker 2: broader sense. The material in evidence is replete with the
7:05
Speaker 2: recognition by the project team that the major theme of
7:08
Speaker 2: the broadcast was the publication of what mister Charraz, the
7:12
Speaker 2: promoter of the project and the regular conduit between Miss
7:15
Speaker 2: Higgins and mister Llewellyn, had pitched to Miss Wilkinson. The
7:19
Speaker 2: credulous approach taken as to the allegations pitched by mister
7:23
Speaker 2: Charraz and as to Miss Higgins's credit, generally lacked both
7:26
Speaker 2: rigor and objectivity. Contrary to the recent assertions of Network teen,
7:30
Speaker 2: a publication is not reasonable simply because it turns out
7:33
Speaker 2: to be true in some respects.
7:36
Speaker 1: Mister Charraz, that's Britney higgins fiance. He pitched the story
7:41
Speaker 1: to Lisa Wilkinson by email under the heading Liberal Party
7:45
Speaker 1: Me Too project pitch Scharaz told Wilkinson it was a
7:49
Speaker 1: story of a young rape victim being silenced by Scott
7:53
Speaker 1: Morrison's federal government. That's something the judge said was not
7:56
Speaker 1: borne out by the facts. He found that, in fact,
7:59
Speaker 1: Minister Reynolds and a chief of staff Fiona Brown, had
8:02
Speaker 1: not tried to cover up the rape or pressure Higgins
8:05
Speaker 1: into silence. Ten tried to argue in its submissions that
8:09
Speaker 1: it wasn't claiming there was a cover up, just that
8:11
Speaker 1: Britney Higgins said. So here's what the judge said about that,
8:15
Speaker 1: and it relates to the way he says TEN and
8:18
Speaker 1: its supporters have crowed about their victory.
8:21
Speaker 2: The result is best characterized as the respondents overcoming a
8:24
Speaker 2: misconceived claim in relation to a broadcast because they were
8:29
Speaker 2: able to prove a trial the substantial truth of what
8:32
Speaker 2: the contemporaneous material demonstrates that they considered to be the
8:36
Speaker 2: less substantial allegation made in the broadcast.
8:39
Speaker 1: In other words, the judge says Ten's chosen to ignore
8:42
Speaker 1: the fact they did present this as a cover up
8:44
Speaker 1: and that that just wasn't true. The judge said, even
8:48
Speaker 1: though TEN and Wilkinson's barristers had made very learned submissions,
8:51
Speaker 1: there was no hiding the fact that Lisa Wilkinson and
8:54
Speaker 1: producer Angus Llewellyn wholly believed Brittney Higgins's story and didn't
8:59
Speaker 1: do an enough to establish whether it was true.
9:02
Speaker 2: This is a case where extensive contemporaneous records demonstrates a
9:06
Speaker 2: very large gulf between the carefully drafted respondents affidavits and
9:09
Speaker 2: the true position as to the immediate and unquestioning belief
9:13
Speaker 2: in miss Higgins's acount by mister Llewellyn and miss Wilkinson,
9:17
Speaker 2: and as to the project team's lack of interest in
9:19
Speaker 2: examining the account properly or obtaining contrary accounts.
9:23
Speaker 1: The reason the judge is going through this is that
9:25
Speaker 1: Lahman's lawyers sought to argue that because Ten lost on
9:28
Speaker 1: the qualified privileged defense, Laman should not have to pay
9:32
Speaker 1: tens legal bills for preparing and running that defense. Ultimately,
9:36
Speaker 1: the judge didn't agree with that argument. He said the
9:39
Speaker 1: two defenses were bound up together. Even if he had
9:42
Speaker 1: serious problems with ten's journalism.
9:45
Speaker 2: One cannot ignore the fact that the relevant conduct of
9:47
Speaker 2: Network ten relating to the publication of the project program
9:50
Speaker 2: was far from reasonable, and the statutory qualified privilege case,
9:54
Speaker 2: while not hopeless, was weak.
9:58
Speaker 1: The judge's other big problem with Network ten's behavior was
10:01
Speaker 1: about the Logis speech made in twenty twenty two, in
10:04
Speaker 1: which Lisa Wilkinson declared.
10:07
Speaker 5: After forty years in journalism, this interview and this story
10:11
Speaker 5: is by far the most important work I have ever done.
10:15
Speaker 5: And I knew it from the very first phone call
10:18
Speaker 5: I had early last year with a young woman whose
10:21
Speaker 5: name she told me was Brittany Higgins.
10:25
Speaker 1: That was eight days before Bruce Lahman was supposed to
10:28
Speaker 1: face the Act Supreme Court in a criminal trial for rape,
10:32
Speaker 1: at which Wilkinson was supposed to be a witness. A
10:35
Speaker 1: furious Act judge delayed the trial because of the speech. Ultimately,
10:39
Speaker 1: the trial was aborted without any finding of guilt against Lamman.
10:44
Speaker 1: The judge said the Logis speech was grossly improper and
10:47
Speaker 1: his slated Ten for approving it and continuing to defend
10:51
Speaker 1: it in this defamation trial. And this brought him back
10:55
Speaker 1: to the lawyer's statement on the court steps and subsequent
10:58
Speaker 1: interviews where he defended Ten's journalism.
11:02
Speaker 2: Following the delivery of judgment, however, a solicitor spokesman retained
11:05
Speaker 2: on behalf of Network Ten made what might be described
11:08
Speaker 2: as a victory tour and express public comments relevant to
11:11
Speaker 2: the relevant findings, and repeatedly expressed the view the Logi
11:14
Speaker 2: speech not only did not have the tendency to interfee with
11:17
Speaker 2: the administration of justice, but presented no difficulty whatsoever.
11:21
Speaker 1: If you've been listening to the front, you'll know. The
11:23
Speaker 1: judge demanded an explanation from Ten. He wanted to know
11:27
Speaker 1: if Ten thought the Logi speech was still a good
11:29
Speaker 1: idea despite the fact he'd slammed it in his judgment.
11:34
Speaker 1: This was high stakes stuff for Ten. The risk was
11:37
Speaker 1: that if the judge was sufficiently annoyed, he could throw
11:40
Speaker 1: out ten's costs claim altogether and it'd be left footing
11:44
Speaker 1: its own bill. Ten and its lawyers humbly asked the
11:48
Speaker 1: judge for forgiveness, saying the remarks were off the cuff
11:51
Speaker 1: and unintentional, and that ten takes its legal obligations very seriously.
11:57
Speaker 2: After these issues were raised, further Affidavidson submissions explaining the
12:01
Speaker 2: considered a current view of Network ten were provided to
12:04
Speaker 2: the court. This material suggests that Soul of Tarsus, like
12:10
Speaker 2: the scales, have belatedly fallen from the anthropmomorphic eyes of
12:14
Speaker 2: Network ten. In the circumstances, no further comment or action
12:17
Speaker 2: from this court is necessary or appropriate.
12:21
Speaker 1: So he's given them a scare and we'll leave it there.
12:25
Speaker 1: Saul of Tarsus, by the way, is also known as
12:29
Speaker 1: Paul the Apostle. He was cured of blindness in the
12:32
Speaker 1: Bible when scales like that of a fish fell from
12:36
Speaker 1: his eyes and he could suddenly see everything clearly.
12:42
Speaker 2: Coming up.
12:43
Speaker 1: What the judge said about Brittney Higgins demand Lisa Wilkinson
12:46
Speaker 1: sack her lawyer. The best coverage of this and all
12:49
Speaker 1: the big trials is at Beaustralian dot com dot a U,
12:52
Speaker 1: where our subscribers are always first to know. On Monday,
12:56
Speaker 1: the appeal of Christopher Michael Dawson of the Teacher's Pet
12:59
Speaker 1: kicks off and will have live blogs and all the
13:02
Speaker 1: news as it happens. Join ours subscribers now by going
13:05
Speaker 1: to the Australian dot Com dot AU and we'll be
13:09
Speaker 1: back after this break. One of the side shows that
13:24
Speaker 1: occupied Michael Lee's time during this trial was a cost
13:27
Speaker 1: dispute between Lisa Wilkinson and her employer's Network ten. That's
13:32
Speaker 1: still raging, by the way, and it will be determined
13:34
Speaker 1: by an independent referee who'll decide how much everyone's bills
13:38
Speaker 1: are and who pays what later this month. But it's
13:41
Speaker 1: thanks to that cross claim that the court heard a
13:43
Speaker 1: large amount of evidence about what was going on within
13:46
Speaker 1: Network ten as its relationship with its star Lisa Wilkinson deteriorated.
13:53
Speaker 1: The LOGI speech cost Wilkinson her role on the project.
13:57
Speaker 1: In November twenty twenty two, she made an emotional exit,
14:01
Speaker 1: positioning it as her decision rather than ten's.
14:06
Speaker 5: I have had a ball, but for me right now
14:10
Speaker 5: it's time for a change. To be clear, I'm not
14:13
Speaker 5: leaving ten and we're looking at some very exciting work
14:17
Speaker 5: ideas ahead. But I also have to be honest with you.
14:21
Speaker 3: The last six.
14:22
Speaker 5: Months have not been easy and the relentless targeted toxicity
14:27
Speaker 5: by some sections of the media has taken a toll,
14:31
Speaker 5: not just on me, but on people I love.
14:35
Speaker 1: Hiring Wilkinson had been a major coup for Ten back
14:38
Speaker 1: in twenty seventeen. That's because Wilkinson, the popular long term
14:42
Speaker 1: co host of rival network nine's Today Breakfast program, had
14:47
Speaker 1: quit Nine on a point of principle she wasn't earning
14:50
Speaker 1: as much as her male co host, Karl Stefanovic. Wilkinson
14:54
Speaker 1: then brought in the Higgins story. It had been broken
14:58
Speaker 1: earlier that day by Samantha Maiden of new Um dot Au,
15:01
Speaker 1: but the project had Higgins on camera. It was a
15:05
Speaker 1: rating success that turned into a social juggernaut as Higgins's
15:09
Speaker 1: story captivated Australians angry about violence against women.
15:14
Speaker 3: We are all here today not because we want to
15:16
Speaker 3: be here, but because we have to be here. We
15:20
Speaker 3: fundamentally recognize the system is broken. We are here because
15:24
Speaker 3: it's unfathomable. But we are still having to fight the
15:28
Speaker 3: same stale, tired fight.
15:34
Speaker 1: But the LOGI speech, which should have been a jewel
15:36
Speaker 1: in Ten's crown, was tarnished when the act judge reacted
15:40
Speaker 1: with such fury and delayed the trial. Wilkinson has not
15:45
Speaker 1: returned to an on air role, even though she's still
15:48
Speaker 1: employed by Ten. Documents tended to court show Wilkinson felt
15:52
Speaker 1: abandoned and betrayed by Ten. She insisted Ten and its
15:57
Speaker 1: lawyers had approved the speech and even asked to make
16:00
Speaker 1: it as a deliberate show of support for Brittney Higgins.
16:05
Speaker 1: Wilkinson was right, and part of tense humiliation in this
16:08
Speaker 1: trial was that its treatment of Wilkinson was laid bare.
16:16
Speaker 1: When Bruce Lahman first indicated he was suing Lisa, Wilkinson
16:19
Speaker 1: hired her own solicitors and barrister Prominent Senior Council Sucris Amfu,
16:24
Speaker 1: and that turned into another dispute with Ten. Buried in
16:28
Speaker 1: all the documents that surfaced in the cross claim, but
16:31
Speaker 1: found by Justice Lee was an unusual request from Brittaney
16:35
Speaker 1: Higgins solicitor Leon's wire well before this trial kicked off.
16:39
Speaker 6: It is important for your clients to appreciate that Brittany
16:42
Speaker 6: is doing so on the basis that your clients will
16:45
Speaker 6: not offer Luhman a payment of damages or a retraction
16:49
Speaker 6: of the defamatory statements, or an apology or costs or
16:53
Speaker 6: any other relief to settle the civil claims commenced by
16:57
Speaker 6: Lerhman against your clients. For the avoidance of any misunderstandings,
17:03
Speaker 6: Brittany has instructed me not to assist lawyers and counsel
17:06
Speaker 6: currently retained by Lisa Wilkinson to defend civil claims commenced
17:12
Speaker 6: by Luhmann against Lisa Wilkinson. I am not prepared to
17:16
Speaker 6: work with Lisa's current senior counsel under any circumstances.
17:21
Speaker 1: There's a complicated backstory. Chrisanfu had acted for Brittany Higgins
17:26
Speaker 1: in the past briefly, but some of her other prominent
17:29
Speaker 1: cases had included acting for Jeffrey Rush, the actor who
17:32
Speaker 1: successfully sued for defamation over sexual harassment claims, and former
17:36
Speaker 1: Attorney General Christian Porter, who also faced unproven claims of
17:40
Speaker 1: sexual misconduct. But there's a rule barristers have to act
17:45
Speaker 1: for any client that asks, unless they've got a conflict
17:48
Speaker 1: of interest or are already engaged. So the judge came
17:52
Speaker 1: in strongly on the side of Chrisanthu. He noted that
17:56
Speaker 1: after Leon's Wire's email, Ten did make Laman an offer
18:00
Speaker 1: to settle, but it didn't include any damages or apology
18:04
Speaker 1: Justice Higgins had requested. The judge also noted that ten's boss,
18:08
Speaker 1: Beverly mcgavey had repeatedly tried to get Lisa Wilkinson to
18:11
Speaker 1: drop Suchrisantheu and the solicitors Leon's Wire had objected to.
18:17
Speaker 1: Ten denied that acted on the demands in Leon's Wire's letter.
18:21
Speaker 1: The judge found that, curious.
18:23
Speaker 2: By reason of the fact that Miss mcgavey, on behalf
18:26
Speaker 2: of Network ten at least twice expressly referred to the
18:28
Speaker 2: conditions as a reason why Miss Wilkinson should replace her
18:31
Speaker 2: chosen senior council, it appeared to me available to infer
18:35
Speaker 2: that what might be thought to be the appropriate response
18:38
Speaker 2: to Miss Higgins solicitor was not conveyed. That would have
18:41
Speaker 2: been to say, with respect that if Miss Higgins did
18:43
Speaker 2: not wish to operate with Network ten without imposing conditions
18:46
Speaker 2: upon representation of a party and potential sediment options, then
18:50
Speaker 2: Miss Higgins will need to be subpoened and shall be
18:53
Speaker 2: obliged to assist a court of justice in coming along
18:56
Speaker 2: to tell the truth until excused.
18:59
Speaker 1: Ultimately, the judge said he accepted the reassurances of Ten's counsel,
19:02
Speaker 1: Matt Collins Casey that Ten had not felt itself bound
19:05
Speaker 1: by the Zoia letter. So here's what the judge ruled
19:12
Speaker 1: on costs. Ten and Wilkinson can recover costs from Laman
19:15
Speaker 1: on an indemnity basis. That means the vast majority of
19:19
Speaker 1: the bill, but that only applies to the truth defense,
19:22
Speaker 1: which they won. On the other defense qualified privilege, which
19:26
Speaker 1: they lost, Ten and Wilkinson can recover costs on an
19:29
Speaker 1: ordinary or party to party basis, which means about seventy
19:33
Speaker 1: percent of its costs. There are a couple of exceptions,
19:36
Speaker 1: but it's the best result Ten and Wilkinson could have
19:38
Speaker 1: hoped for. The matter comes back to court on May
19:41
Speaker 1: twenty seven, when the judge will decide the terms of
19:43
Speaker 1: reference for the referee. He'll sort out exactly how big
19:47
Speaker 1: the bills are and who pays what, And then it
19:50
Speaker 1: was over, But for one last Michael Lee Mike.
19:54
Speaker 2: Drop I published my reasons call the next matter.
20:07
Speaker 1: If you're missing Justice Lee already, don't worry. He'll be
20:10
Speaker 1: back in another big court case soon and we'll be
20:13
Speaker 1: covering it for our subscribers. This week, there's the Federal
20:16
Speaker 1: budget and Chris Dawson's appeal to keep us busy. Join
20:19
Speaker 1: our subscribers at the Australian dot com dot a U
20:22
Speaker 1: and help us make Australia's best journalism. The front is
20:26
Speaker 1: made by Kristin Amiot, Joshua Burton, Tiffany Didymac Lee at Sammaglue,
20:30
Speaker 1: Jasper League, Matthew Condon and me Claire Harvey