Bruce Lehrmann Defamation Appeal: High Court Challenge

“`html

Lehrmann Takes Defamation Battle too High Court, Citing Judicial Misconduct

A former Liberal staffer is escalating his legal fight with Network 10 and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, filing an appeal with the High court. The move represents the latest chapter in a complex defamation case stemming from a 2021 interview on The Project with Brittany Higgins, where she first publicly alleged she was sexually assaulted at Parliament House.

The documents submitted to the High Court detail grounds for appeal, focusing on allegations of impropriety during the initial proceedings. Last month, the Federal Court dismissed Lehrmann’s appeal against a ruling by Justice Michael Lee, who found, on the balance of probabilities, that he had raped Ms. Higgins in 2019. Lehrmann continues to maintain his innocence, consistently denying any sexual activity took place.

Did you know? – Defamation law requires a plaintiff to prove harm to their reputation. In this case, the finding of rape undermined lehrmann’s claim, even without direct naming.

claims of Judicial Overreach

Central to Lehrmann’s High court application is the claim that the Federal Court of Appeal erred in upholding the justification defenses presented by Network 10 and Wilkinson. The application alleges Justice Lee engaged in autonomous research that compromised the impartiality of the case.

“The primary judge inappropriately conducted research and obtained extraneous materials,” the application states.”Those materials were not irrelevant to the critical justification defense of factual findings being made by the primary judge.” According to the filing, these actions “thereby compromised” the factual findings and resulted in a lack of impartial judicial power in certain aspects of the case.

Pro tip – “Balance of probabilities” means it’s more likely then not something happened. It’s a lower standard of proof than “beyond a reasonable doubt” used in criminal trials.

Dispute Over Knowledge of Consent

The appeal also challenges the Court of Appeal’s findings regarding lehrmann’s understanding of consent. Justice Lee initially persistent Lehrmann’s knowledge regarding consent amounted to “non-advertent recklessness.” However, the appeal court judges – Justice michael Wigney, Justice Craig Colvin, and Justice Wendy Abraham – accepted an argument from Network 10 and Wilkinson that Justice Lee should have concluded Lehrmann possessed “actual knowledge” that Ms. Higgins did not consent to sexual intercourse.

Lehrmann’s legal team contends that the evidence presented did not support such a definitive conclusion. The application requests that both previous judgements be overturned and a new judge be assigned to determine the damages owed to lehrmann. Alternatively, it suggests a fresh panel of Federal Court judges could review the case.

Reader question – What happens if Lehrmann doesn’t secure special leave to appeal? The Federal Court’s rulings would stand, and he would likely be required to pay the $2 million in costs.

The Stakes: Defamation and Financial Ruin

Lehrmann initiated the legal action against Network 10 and Wilkinson, alleging defamation as a result of the Project interview, despite Ms. Higgins not explicitly naming him.However, Justice Lee’s finding that the allegation of rape was, on the balance of probabilities, true effectively invalidated the defamation claim. Lehrmann was subsequently ordered to pay Network 10 costs totaling $2 million.

That payment has been deferred pending the outcome of the appeals process, but concerns have been raised about Lehrmann’s ability to meet the financial obligation. Court proceedings have revealed his precarious financial situation.

A History of Legal Challenges

Prior to the civil defamation case, Lehrmann faced criminal charges in the ACT Supreme Court in 2022. That trial was ultimately abandoned due to juror misconduct, and the Director of Public Prosecutions decided not to pursue a retrial, leaving lehrmann in a state of legal limbo.