Bruce Lehrmann ordered to pay Channel Ten and Lisa Wilkinson's costs over failed defamation case, as it happened
By Greta Stonehouse and Patrick BellThe Federal Court has ordered Bruce Lehrmann to pay Network Ten's costs of defending his failed defamation case over the interview with Brittany Higgins on The Project.
Justice Michael Lee has ordered the costs be paid "on an indemnity basis" for most of the case, except for the costs of Ten's failed qualified privilege defence.
Look back at our live coverage.
Key events
Live updates
Justice Lee is done (for the day)
By Luke Royes
Network Ten theoretically won big today, but as Justice Lee put it: "There are no real winners in this litigation."
"Of course, with the predictability of an atomic clock, partisans have focused solely on those parts of the judgment that happen to align with preconceived notions," he said.
He said his "mixed findings" were obscured by comments made by Ten's lawyers, but later ultimately condemned Mr Lehrmann's conduct to the point he awarded the largest percentage of costs for most of the trial, in Ten's favour.
Both parties will return later in May to discuss what that bill amounts to.
That's all from us today, but in the meantime, here is a complete wrap of today's developments and you can read Justice Lee's entire costs decision here.
Update on Linda Reynolds's case against Higgins and her fiancé
By Luke Royes
Meanwhile, ABC reporter Rebecca Trigger has been sitting inside today’s WA Supreme Court hearing dealing with the defamation accusations brought by federal MP Linda Reynolds against Ms Higgins and her fiancé David Sharaz.
Ms Reynolds is suing the pair over a series of social media posts on their accounts which she says damaged her reputation.
The trial is set to begin over six weeks from July 24, but there will be one more attempt at mediation on May 21 to try and resolve it before it gets to that point.
Today, it was all about the role Mr Sharaz would — or wouldn’t — play in the matter.
Ms Higgins’ lawyer today told the court Mr Sharaz would not appear as a witness for the defence — in fact, he would not be participating in any way.
But it is still unclear how much involvement he will play, despite Ms Reynolds’s lawyer’s attempts to find out exactly what that means.
The critical issue in Justice Lee's decision
By Greta Stonehouse
With court reporter Patrick Bell.
It appears a critical issue for Justice Lee in making this decision was Mr Lehrmann's denial that any sexual activity took place while the pair were in the office of Senator Linda Reynolds.
Justice Lee said, even in an alternative where he did not find the rape took place, he was unable to find there was no sex at all.
"In any non-fanciful, albeit unlikely scenario, Mr Lehrmann had sexual intercourse with Ms Higgins, and yet ran a primary case ... that early on 23 March 2019, he was preoccupied with noting up details as to French submarine contracts."
"Even if I had not reached the level of satisfaction Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins ... I would have declined to award costs in Mr Lehrmann's favour."
The moment Justice Lee decides costs
By Greta Stonehouse
Costs bill not determined
By Greta Stonehouse
The amount that Network Ten theoretically stand to gain from the costs decision has not yet been heard.
Media experts have predicted it could be upwards of $8 million.
Justice Lee asked the parties to submit how much they estimate their legal bills amount to by May 24.
A case management hearing will then follow on May 27.
Lisa Wilkinson's costs
By Greta Stonehouse
Justice Lee has awarded Lisa Wilkinson indemnity costs "in the same terms" that he outlined for Network Ten.
He confirmed that a referee would be appointed to determine what those should be, as Network Ten will be covering the bulk of her bill.
As is the case with the media giant, Wilkinson will not be awarded indemnity costs where the qualified defence privilege failed.
Network wins costs on an indemnity basis
By Luke Royes
Justice Lee has awarded costs in favour of Network Ten on an indemnity basis, for most of the trial.
This is rare and means that they recoup more than what would be recovered if they were just awarded party to party costs.
Justice Lee gave several reasons for this.
He said Mr Lehrmann defended his case on the "false basis", lied to police "and then allowed that lie" to go before a jury.
"He wrongly instructed his senior counsel to cross examine the complainant of sexual assault in two legal proceedings, including relevantly for present purposes, in this case, on a knowingly false premise."
Mr Lehrmann denies he sexually assaulted Ms Higgins and was not convicted in his criminal trial after it was aborted.
Network Ten will only recover normal party-party costs for any part of Justice Lee's decision that failed the qualified privilege defence.
However, whether Mr Lehrmann has the means to pay those costs is unlikely.
Judge says Lehrmann should pay Ten's costs
By Luke Royes
With court reporter Patrick Bell.
Justice Lee has confirmed that he believes it is appropriate for Mr Lehrmann to pay Network Ten's costs.
He is now moving to the issue of what share of costs he will have to pay.
Network Ten's conduct outside court
By Greta Stonehouse
Justice Lee has been critical of Network Ten's conduct after his judgment and comments he found "misleading".
Outside court after the decision, Ten's lawyer Justin Quill said Justice Lee's decision was vindication of their conduct, but criticised defamation law, and said it was "divorced from reality".
Justice Lee said he was "not convinced" any post judgment conduct could always be irrelevant to costs orders.
But said he did not consider "any mischaracterisations of my judgment" relevant to his decision today and put them to one side.
'Mixed findings'
By Luke Royes
With court reporter Patrick Bell.
Justice Michael Lee told the court he has considered all of his findings in the main case when considering the costs issue, not just the successful truth defence.
Network Ten failed to prove its conduct in publishing the episode of The Project was reasonable.
"The reality of mixed findings has been somewhat obscured," Justice Lee said.
"I dealt with all pleaded issues, rather than simply deciding what turned out to be the determinative justification defence."
'No real winners'
By Greta Stonehouse
Justice Michael Lee has opened his costs decision hearing by saying there were "no real winners" in this defamation case.
Although the respondents justified the imputation of "rape," he said of the Network Ten's Project Team "their conduct was not justifiable in any broader sense."
"Contrary to the recent assertions of Network Ten a publication is not reasonable simply because it turns out to be true in some respects."
What did each side argue?
By Greta Stonehouse
With court reporter Patrick Bell.
Network Ten wants Bruce Lehrmann to pay costs on "an indemnity basis", which is an order reserved for exceptional circumstances.
Essentially, it's argued Mr Lehrmann wasted everyone's time, because he started a "baseless" case.
"In doing so, he engaged in a prolonged and conscious effort to mislead the Court," Ten's submissions say.
Bruce Lehrmann's lawyers have conceded this is one option available to Justice Lee, but said it was reasonable for him to have started the case.
Then, there's the question of how much of Lisa Wilkinson's bill Network Ten will have to cover.
That's likely to go before a referee.
One thing we're yet to hear is exact figures on how much the case cost, although some experts have estimated it could be as much as $8 million.
A brief recap
By Greta Stonehouse
With court reporter Patrick Bell.
It's been almost a month since Justice Michael Lee delivered his judgment in the main case Bruce Lehrmann brought against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson.
His defamation claim failed when Justice Lee found, on the balance of probabilities, Mr Lehrmann did rape Brittany Higgins at Parliament House in 2019.
That is, of course, not a finding a criminal court has ever made, after the trial in the ACT was abandoned due to juror misconduct.
Today, Justice Lee will deliver his decision on who should pay the costs of the case, and what share they will be up for.
We already know from the last time the case was in court that Bruce Lehrmann will have to pay something, but how much exactly remains in doubt.
We also found out earlier this week that Mr Lehrmann's lawyers took the case on a "no-win, no-fee" arrangement.
Lehrmann likely to receive bill for millions
By Greta Stonehouse
During a hearing last week Justice Michael Lee indicated what direction he was headed in when it came to a decision over costs.
You can catch-up on why that is with our story published earlier today by Canberra reporter Elizabeth Byrne.
Update
By Greta Stonehouse
Hello,
Greta Stonehouse and court reporter Patrick Bell from Canberra are here to keep you updated with all the important information from the costs decision today.
From 2:15pm, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee will deliver his ruling about costs and what percentage of them Bruce Lehrmann will have to pay.
We are not expecting a long session, as Justice Lee last week told the court he was "keen to get this all off my plate".
Stay tuned.