The judge presiding over Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation case said it was reasonable for the former host of The Project to obtain separate lawyers to Ten in fighting the lawsuit.
Federal Court Justice Michael Lee said in a decision on Wednesday that it was reasonable for Wilkinson to retain her own lawyers in the defamation case rather than being represented by lawyers for her employer, Ten, because there were “differences in the interests” each sought to protect.
Elliott said Ten had claimed it did not have to pay a “brass razoo” because she had opted for a separate team headed by Sydney silk Sue Chrysanthou, SC, but this position had only become clear to Wilkinson’s team on “the virtual eve” of the defamation trial last year. The court heard Wilkinson faced a wave of negative publicity after the trial was delayed, and she did not believe two statements issued publicly by Ten indicating its support for Wilkinson made clear that the speech had been approved at the highest levels of Ten including its chief executive.
Lee has reserved his decision in the defamation case and is expected to deliver his judgment as early as next month. Qualified privilege is a defence relating to publications of public interest where a publisher, including its journalists, acted reasonably. It is possible for different findings about reasonableness to be made against different employees of a publisher, and Wilkinson’s lawyers had argued she acted reasonably in relying on other staff at Ten including its lawyers.
After Ten dropped its argument that it was unreasonable for Wilkinson to retain separate lawyers, it argued there was a remaining question about the specific costs it was liable to cover. That issue has yet to be resolved.