Community 10 and its former star Lisa Wilkinson stay at loggerheads over the journalist’s authorized invoice incurred in efficiently defending its high-stakes defamation battle in opposition to Bruce Lehrmann.
Justice Michael Lee, in a highly-anticipated judgment, final week dismissed Lehrmann’s lawsuit in opposition to Community 10 and Ms Wilkinson after discovering, on the steadiness of possibilities, that the ex-Liberal staffer raped his former colleague Brittany Higgins inside Parliament Home in March 2019.
The matter will return to court docket subsequent week to resolve what portion of Community 10 and Ms Wilkinson’s authorized prices will likely be paid by Lehrmann.
Whole prices for the trial have been estimated to be as excessive as $10m.
Throughout the course of the trial, Ms Wilkinson and Community 10 have been concerned in a cross-claim over the journalist’s determination to rent her personal counsel, revered and high-profile silk Sue Chrysanthou SC.
Justice Lee dominated in February that it was cheap for Ms Wilkinson to retain her personal authorized counsel.
Community 10, in its written submissions with reference to prices, earlier this week stated it didn’t have to choose up the invoice for Ms Wilkinson’s authorized prices which have been “unnecessarily duplicative or wasteful”.
The broadcaster’s barrister Matt Collins argued Ms Wilkinson was obliged to be “prudent” and “cheap” in her prices, and never run up a authorized invoice “on the belief that Community Ten would finally choose up the invoice”.
Community 10 is asking the court docket to nominate a referee to comb via the authorized payments incurred by the previous host of The Venture to resolve whether or not the required prices have been cheap.
The broadcaster acknowledged it was responsible for the prices Ms Wilkinson amassed whereas combating Lehrmann’s declare for damages over her notorious Logies speech and working the defence of certified privilege.
Dr Collins asserted “completely different issues” ought to apply to the journalist’s accumulation of prices in defence of frequent points, resembling the usage of the reality defence.
In additional submissions revealed by the court docket on Wednesday, Ms Wilkinson’s attorneys argued Community 10 was responsible for any “fairly incurred prices decided on the solicitor-client foundation”.
They stated Community 10’s competition that Ms Wilkinson’s authorized invoice must be selected a “frequent” or “non-common” points foundation had beforehand been dismissed by the court docket as a part of the cross-claim, and that the broadcaster was “impermissibly” searching for “to reagitate that situation”.
They sought orders that, within the occasion the 2 events couldn’t agree on an quantity, the court docket appoint a “referee” to find out how a lot of Ms Wilkinson’s authorized invoice Community 10 was responsible for.
The matter will return to court docket subsequent Wednesday.
