Login
Centrelink, OnlyFans, and advertising revenue behind Lehrmann’s objection to security of costs
The lawyer for Bruce Lehrmann told the Federal Court the only way he could come up with $200,000 to secure his appeal hearing would be if he turned to “OnlyFans or something silly like that”.
Naomi Neilson
Before Lehrmann could commence an appeal of Justice Michael Lee’s April judgment, Network Ten asked the Federal Court to grant a security of costs application for a sum between $170,000 and $200,000, depending on whether the hearing lasts one or three days.
His lawyer, Zali Burrows – who was better known for her appearances in criminal proceedings – told Justice Wendy Abraham that Lehrmann is “probably Australia’s most hated man” and, given he is unemployed, has been relying on a Centrelink income.
She submitted the appeal would have to be abandoned if the security for costs application is granted because the only way Lehrmann could find the money would be “by going on OnlyFans”, an online subscription service primarily used by sex workers.
Further, Burrows argued the $200,000 sum is “disingenuous” because Network Ten would allegedly “make that just on advertising revenue [from] reporting on these proceedings”.
“It is not a considerable amount of money for the respondents; it is not going to harm them. Although it is strong, this application for security of costs is a bullying tactic to shut down this appeal because they know my client is not able to come up with $200,000.
“Lehrmann is arguably, probably Australia’s most hated man; you cannot imagine the worst type of defamation against someone than being called a rapist. He’s a young man; he has his whole life [ahead] of him, and he needs his day in court,” Burrows said.
In respect of the grounds of appeal, Burrows argued that should the appeal go ahead, Lehrmann could “list 30 to 40 differences” in the findings made by Justice Lee and the submissions by the parties.
On behalf of Network Ten, Dr Matthew Collins AM KC said the fact Lehrmann does not have the capacity to meet the security for costs order weighs “heavily in favour of granting the application”.
He added that Lehrmann has had more than one day in court already, “in circumstances where factual findings were made against him”.
“Of course, the findings are devastating to Lehrmann, but it doesn’t mean the reversal of those findings serves some broader public interest. He had his day in court, he had a very expensive trial that was conducted in the full glare of the entire nation, he was ably represented, and [Justice Lee] made findings at the end of the day of the kind that civil courts make every day,” Collins said.
Justice Abrahams reserved her decision.
Naomi Neilson
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
