Bruce Lehrmann has suffered a comprehensive legal defeat after the full bench of the Federal Court dismissed his appeal against a landmark defamation judgment. The court not only upheld the finding that he raped Brittany Higgins but went further, stating he was aware she did not consent.
Appeal judges strengthen findings on consent
The three appeal justices—Michael Wigney, Craig Colvin, and Wendy Abraham—delivered a resounding rejection of Lehrmann's case on Wednesday. They reinforced the initial trial judge's conclusion, finding on the balance of probabilities that Lehrmann raped fellow Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins in a Parliament House office in 2019.
Critically, the appeal bench stated that the trial judge, Justice Michael Lee, should have found that Lehrmann had actual knowledge Higgins did not consent. This marks a significant strengthening of the ruling against the former political aide.
A comprehensive loss on all grounds
Lehrmann's legal team mounted an appeal on four separate grounds, all of which were dismissed by the court. The judges rejected arguments of procedural unfairness and claims about how viewers of the original Project broadcast would have interpreted the allegations.
Furthermore, the court upheld Justice Lee's finding that Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson had met their burden of proof regarding the rape allegation. Lehrmann also failed in a bid to have a potential costs award increased beyond £10,000, had he been successful.
Scrutiny of journalistic conduct
The appeal judgment also addressed the defence of qualified privilege, which relates to responsible journalism. The three justices respectfully disagreed with aspects of Justice Lee's criticism of Wilkinson's conduct.
They noted that Lee appeared not to have considered supporting evidence for Higgins's account, including her official report to the Australian Federal Police and the questions Ten put to witnesses before broadcast. This represents a partial vindication of the journalistic process undertaken by Wilkinson and her team.
Mounting debts and future legal battles
The failed appeal compounds Lehrmann's severe financial predicament. His debt, which includes approximately £1 million in costs from the initial trial, continues to grow with the addition of costs for this appeal. The court has heard he cannot afford legal representation and has no means to repay the debt, having relied on pro bono lawyers while studying law.
Outside court, his lawyer, Zali Burrows, called Lehrmann "an inspiration to those who say they've been wrongly accused" and painted him as a victim. She revealed that despite this significant loss, Lehrmann is considering applying for special leave to appeal to the High Court, indicating the legal fight may continue.
The judgment solidifies a defining legal and political saga, with profound implications for discussions around sexual consent, media responsibility, and the defamation landscape.
