High Court Dismisses Defamation Appeal
The High Court of Australia has dismissed Bruce Lehrmann's application for special leave to appeal, finalizing his legal avenues to contest Federal Court findings in his defamation case. This decision upholds the Federal Court's previous ruling that, on the balance of probabilities, Mr. Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in 2019.
The High Court's dismissal means the Federal Court's finding that Bruce Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House stands.
Background of the Defamation Proceedings
- Initial Allegations: In 2021, former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins publicly alleged she was raped in 2019 on a couch in Parliament House. Although the alleged perpetrator was not named, Bruce Lehrmann, a Liberal colleague at the time, claimed he was identifiable.
- Criminal Trial: Mr. Lehrmann pleaded not guilty to a charge of sexual intercourse without consent in the ACT Supreme Court in 2022. The criminal trial was aborted due to juror misconduct, and the charges were subsequently dropped by prosecutors, citing an "unacceptable risk" to Ms. Higgins's health if a retrial were pursued. Mr. Lehrmann has consistently denied all allegations.
- Defamation Case: In 2023, Mr. Lehrmann sued Network Ten and presenter Lisa Wilkinson for defamation over an interview with Ms. Higgins broadcast on "The Project." Justice Michael Lee dismissed Mr. Lehrmann's claim, finding, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr. Lehrmann had sexually assaulted Ms. Higgins. Justice Lee initially concluded that Mr. Lehrmann's knowledge concerning consent amounted to "non-advertent recklessness."
- Federal Court Appeal: Mr. Lehrmann appealed the defamation judgment. In December 2023, the full bench of the Federal Court dismissed his appeal, upholding Justice Lee's finding. The appeal judges, however, accepted a submission from Network Ten and Ms. Wilkinson that Justice Lee should have found Mr. Lehrmann had "actual knowledge" that Ms. Higgins did not consent to sex. Mr. Lehrmann was ordered to cover the costs incurred by Network Ten and Ms. Wilkinson for the appeal, with court proceedings indicating his financial capacity might hinder payment.
Grounds for High Court Challenge
Mr. Lehrmann's application to the High Court challenged the Federal Court's findings on several grounds, including:
- Claims that Justice Lee "inappropriately conducted research and obtained extraneous materials" beyond the expert material agreed upon in the case, thereby compromising his factual findings and constituting a non-impartial exercise of judicial power.
- Allegations that the full bench of the Federal Court erred by concluding Mr. Lehrmann had actual knowledge that Ms. Higgins did not consent, arguing this finding exceeded the primary judge's initial assessment of "non-advertent recklessness."
- Disputes regarding the interpretation of the term "rape" in the context of the broadcast, arguing an ordinary reasonable viewer would have understood it to mean "the rape and injury of an unconscious and then protesting woman," rather than a broader interpretation.
The application requested that both the primary judgment and the appeal judgment be set aside, proposing either a new judge determine damages or a fresh panel of Federal Court judges review the case. These arguments were ultimately not accepted by the High Court, leading to the dismissal of the application for special leave to appeal.
Reporting Restrictions Lifted in Queensland Rape Case
Reporting restrictions concerning a separate Queensland rape case involving Bruce Lehrmann have been lifted after nearly three weeks. Mr. Lehrmann is accused of raping a woman in a Toowoomba nightclub in 2021 following a night involving drugs. He has been committed to stand trial in 2024, with the Crown alleging a lack of consent. The complainant testified that she told Mr. Lehrmann to "stop what you are doing." Mr. Lehrmann is expected to face trial on November 2 and plans to fight the charges.
Reporting restrictions have been lifted for Bruce Lehrmann's upcoming Queensland rape trial, scheduled for November 2.
Origin and Lifting of the Non-Publication Order
- Initial Order: During a hearing on March 19 in the District Court in Brisbane, Judge Deborah Richards issued a non-publication order. This decision followed a misinterpretation by Mr. Lehrmann's legal team of an earlier order. The initial order broadly prevented media outlets from publishing information related to the case, including his trial date.
- Legal Challenge and Extension: Media lawyers representing Nine Newspapers, News Corp Australia, and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation challenged the non-publication order. Judge Richards clarified that she did not believe the media had breached any previous order and that Mr. Lehrmann’s lawyer, Zali Burrows, had interpreted an earlier order more broadly than intended. The initial suppression was set to last less than a week but was extended when Mr. Lehrmann failed to meet deadlines for filing application documents on March 23 and April 2.
- Lifting of Restrictions: Mr. Lehrmann abandoned his application to continue the suppression order one hour before the court closed for the Easter long weekend. Media outlets had requested an immediate lifting of the restrictions, but the reporting embargo remained in effect until Tuesday, April 7.
Previous Suppression Attempts
This recent non-publication order was not the first instance of attempts to restrict reporting or identify Mr. Lehrmann in connection with the Queensland case. In 2023, his lawyers sought orders to prevent his identification after Queensland laws changed to allow accused rapists to be named before trial commitment. Justice Peter Applegarth ruled that Mr. Lehrmann should be identified, citing his comments in national television interviews as undermining his mental health grounds for anonymity.