In recent weeks, the matter of Bruce Lehrmann v Network 10 grabbed national headlines. Shedding light on the complexities of Defamation Law in Australia. This legal saga emerged against the backdrop of allegations by Brittany Higgins of sexual assault by Bruce during her time as a political staffer. Both these matters amplified discussions surrounding consent, accountability and the power dynamics in media. As it currently stands, the opportunity to examine the facts and findings of this case, along with the application of Defamation Law, provides valuable insights into the nuances of protecting reputation while upholding freedom of speech

Bruce Lehrmann v Network 10: The facts

In April 2023, Bruce Lehrmann, a former political staffer, filed a defamation case against Network 10 and journalist Lisa Wilkinson following remarks made on The Project in 2021 regarding allegations of sexual assault by Brittany Higgins against a colleague. Wilkinson's commentary, though not explicitly naming Lehrmann, linked him to allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards women within the political sphere, casting a shadow over his reputation.

In November of that year, Brittany Higgins testified in Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation action against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson. At the time, Lehrmann argued that he was “easily identifiable” in Network 10’s reporting of the alleged event, and suffered reputational damage as a result.  Conversely, the network argued a truth defence -  attempting to establish that reporting of Higgins’ allegation she was sexually assaulted by Lerhmann was fair.

Higgins took to the stand as part of the network’s defence, giving a detailed description of the night in question, recalling how Lehrmann allegedly raped her in Parliament House in 2019.

Against Lehrmann's denial of any wrongdoing, the court examined the context and potential impact of Wilkinson's statements on public perception.

Application of Defamation Law in Australia 

Defamation Law in Australia is designed to safeguard individuals' reputations from unjustified attacks on their character or integrity. Governed by common law and statutes, defamation occurs when a person's reputation is harmed by the publication of false statements to a third party. To establish defamation, the plaintiff must prove that the statement refers to them, is defamatory in nature, and has been published to a third party.

Australian Defamation Law recognises two forms of defamation: libel (written or permanent form) and slander (spoken or transient form). The law seeks to strike a balance between protecting reputation and upholding freedom of expression, acknowledging the importance of public interest and fair comment in democratic societies.

Findings and fallouts 

In this case, the court meticulously applied defamation law to assess the veracity of Wilkinson's statements and their impact on Lehrmann's reputation. The defence of truth was central to Network 10 and Wilkinson's arguments, emphasising the importance of responsible journalism and accuracy in reporting sensitive issues such as sexual assault.

In a historic judgement, delivered on Apri 15 2024, Justice Michael Lee upheld Network 10 and Lisa Wilkinson’s defence of truth. Finding that they had proven, on the balance of probabilities, that Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in March 2019. 

While the ruling did not amount to a criminal conviction, Justice Lee found that Bruce Lehrmann did rape Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in 2019, based on the civil court’s standard of proof. In his ruling for the civil defamation case Bruce Lerhmann brought against Lisa Wilkinson and Channel 10, he said Lehrmann “has now been found, at the civil standard of proof, to engage in a great wrong. It follows Ms Higgins has been proven to be a victim of sexual assault."

The Bruce Lehrmann v Network 10 case has significant implications for the future application of defamation law in Australia. It serves as a poignant reminder of the complexities inherent in defamation law and the ethical responsibilities of media professionals. As Australia continues to grapple with debates surrounding consent, gender equality, and accountability, this case underscores the need for robust legal frameworks that balance the protection of individuals' reputations with the principles of freedom of expression. By studying the nuances of this case, we can glean valuable insights into the evolving landscape of media ethics and the imperative of balanced, responsible journalism in contemporary society.

Please note this is general information and not legal advice. The experienced team at New South Lawyers is available to assist with any specific questions or advice required.

New South Lawyers’ communications are intended to provide commentary and general information. They should not be relied upon as legal advice. Formal legal advice should be sought in particular transactions or on matters of interest arising from this communication.

To find out more about Defamation Law in Australia, chat with a member of New South Lawyers' Team today.