By -

The path has been cleared for former political staffer Bruce Lehmann to continue with his appeal against the outcome of his failed defamation case against Network 10 and journalist Lisa Wilkinson.

The Federal Court found in April that on the balance of probabilities, Lehrmann had raped colleague Brittany Higgins at Parliament House in Canberra in March 2019. 

The defamation action stemmed from a segment of The Project in February 2021. 

In June, Justice Michael Lee ordered Lehrmann pay $2 million in costs to Network 10. 

Lehrmann had already filed a notice of appeal while unrepresented but has since appointed solicitor Zali Burrows as his representative. 

His grounds for appeal include that the primary judge erred in upholding the defence of justification, because the case found was different to the one pleaded. It’s also claimed the judge erred in determining the meanings conveyed in the broadcast. 

Network 10 sought orders requiring Lehrmann to pay $200,000 (or an amount the court may determine) as security within 42 days, and that his appeal be dismissed if he failed to comply. 

But Justice Wendy Abraham today dismissed Ten’s application for security. 

She also granted Lehrmann’s application to stay the $2 million costs order, until the appeal is determined. 

Justice Abraham said, “As the appellant essentially submitted, the finding against him is extremely serious. Ms Wilkinson described it as a finding of criminal conduct. The impact on him if he is denied that right (of appeal) is self-evident. That is the likely consequence of making the order the respondents seek. This is in the context of it being accepted there are arguable grounds of appeal.” 

Justice Abraham conceded that Ten and Wilkinson probably won’t be able to recover costs in their favour, should the appeal proceed. 

“Nonetheless, I am not persuaded … that an order for security ought to be made.” 

The judgment outlined that there was no dispute that Lehrmann is on Centrelink benefits and cannot pay the costs order. 

In the circumstances, Justice Abraham found his application for a stay of the costs order should be granted. 

In court, March 2025 was mentioned as a possible time for the hearing of the appeal.