Brittany Higgins has been ordered to pay 80 per cent of her former boss Linda Reynolds' legal costs for their blockbuster defamation trial, in a seismic decision that will likely bankrupt the former Liberal staffer.
Reynolds, the former Defence Minister, was awarded more than $340,000 in damages in a judgement handed down by Justice Paul Tottle in Western Australia's Supreme Court two weeks ago.
She had sued Ms Higgins and her husband David Sharaz over a series of social media posts that she believed damaged her reputation. The court found the posts to be defamatory.
Now, Justice Tottle has ordered Ms Higgins to pay 80 per cent of Reynolds' legal costs - a figure that could well stretch beyond the $1 million mark.
His costs order, published on Tuesday afternoon, also revealed that Ms Higgins had tried to make an offer of settlement offer four days before the six-week defamation trial began.
Through her lawyers, the former Liberal staffer had offered Reynolds a 'confidential payment' totalling $200,000, which would be paid by her parents, with an additional $10,000 Ms Higgins would borrow herself to pay to a women's charity or refuge.
Ms Higgins's lawyers also had drafted a 'mutual statement' that did not apologise for the defamatory posts but instead acknowledged that both parties were genuine in their respective beliefs - that they agreed to disagree.
'They both agree to put these matters behind them and move on,' the proposed mutual statement added.
However, Reynolds rejected this offer of settlement and proceeded to trial - a decision vindicated by Justice Tottle's excoriating, five-point take-down of Ms Higgins' offer of settlement.
He ruled that it did not provide Reynolds 'with any vindication of her reputation' and 'fell short of an apology by a substantial margin'.
'I am satisfied the defendant's failure to make a settlement offer was unreasonable,' Justice Tottle stated.
'It may have been difficult for the defendant to bring herself to consider making a settlement offer to the plaintiff but this does not mean it was not unreasonable for her to have failed to have done so.
'Although the defendant's "trial team" were retained only shortly before the trial, the defendant was represented by experienced lawyers from the very first stages of the dispute.'
Despite being awarded a $2.4 million compensation payout by the Commonwealth, the costs order will likely bankrupt Ms Higgins.
It is believed the remaining money is tied up in a trust. Ms Higgins previously told the court that she only had $10,000 in assets.
The long-awaited judgement found that all three of the social media posts Reynolds complained about were defamatory.
Justice Tottle's costs order, published on Tuesday afternoon, also revealed that Ms Higgins had tried to make an offer of settlement offer four days before the six-week defamation trial began (pictured: retired Senator Linda Reynolds). However, Reynolds rejected this offer of settlement and proceeded to trial - a decision vindicated by Justice Tottle's excoriating, five-point take-down of Ms Higgins' offer of settlement
However, Ms Higgins lodged a successful defence of honest opinion for one of the posts.
He awarded Reynolds $315,000 in damages, plus an extra $26,000 in interest payments backdated to when the posts were made.
The ruling is likely to have massive financial implications for Ms Higgins and her husband Mr Sharaz, as the couple now faces not only having to pay the sizeable damages bill, but also covering Reynolds' legal costs.
'The defendant and Mr David Sharaz published a tweet on 27 January 2022,' Justice Tottle said in his judgement,'which contained two imputations:'
'First, that the plaintiff had pressured the defendant not to proceed with a genuine complaint of sexual assault. And second, that the plaintiff is a hypocrite in her advocacy of gender equality and female empowerment.'
'Both imputations were defamatory The defendant has not established her defence of truth or any of her other defences.'
'Damages, including aggravated damages, in the sum of $135,000 will be awarded.'
A second Instagram post published by Ms Higgins on 4 July 2023, which conveyed the imputations that Reynolds had engagement in a campaign of harassment against her, that she had mishandled the allegation of rape and engaged in questionable conduct during Bruce Lehrmann's trial, was also found to be defamatory.
Justice Tottle awarded damages worth $180,000 to Reynolds for that post.
Ms Higgins and her now-husband David Sharaz now face a mammoth legal bill
A third post, in which Ms Higgins posted tweets on 20 July 2023 which conveyed the imputation that Reynolds wanted to silence the victims of sexual assault was also found to be defamatory.
However, Justice Tottle said that Ms Higgins was able to establish a successful defence of honest opinion, fair comment and qualified privilege.
Ms Reynolds' claim over a tweet she alleged implied she was seeking to silence sexual assault victims failed.
Her claim that Ms Higgins and her husband David Sharaz engaged in a conspiracy to injure her also failed.
Justice Tottle's full ruling runs to 360 pages.
Ms Reynolds, who was in court for the judgement being delivered and reportedly re-mortgaged her house to fund the case, said the ruling was a 'great relief'.
'There was no conspiracy and no political cover-up of a rape,' she said.
'This was never about Ms Higgins' allegation of rape and it was also never about the money.'
'It was always about the dishonest and devastating attack on my reputation that was based on very curated lies by Ms Higgins, Mr Sharaz and the well documented co-conspirators with them.'
Ms Higgins, who was not in court to hear the result, told news.com.au she accepted the judgement an now wanted to 'rebuild' her life.
'I was 24 years old when I was sexually assaulted in Parliament House. Six years have passed -- years marked by challenge, scrutiny and change,' she said.
'I accept that Linda Reynolds’ feelings were hurt by these events and I am sorry for that. I wish her well for the future.'
'Thank you to the Australian public for their compassion and understanding throughout this journey.'
It is unclear whether she will appeal the judgment.
Ms Higgins did not give evidence during the defamation trial for medical reasons.
Her lawyer, Rachael Young, said her client was a courageous woman who was sued for speaking up and her motive for doing so was not to harm the senator but to drive workplace reforms and stop anyone else from experiencing what she had gone through.
She said the social media posts were not defamatory because they were true, and any comments Ms Higgins made were her honestly held opinion and protected by qualified privilege.
Justice Tottle only agreed with regard to one of the three social media posts in question.
Bruce Lehrmann (pictured) has always denied the allegations but was found to have raped Ms Higgins on the balance of probabilities by Justice Michael Lee in April last year - a decision he is currently appealing
Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz were forced to sell their chateau in France in June this year amid their mounting legal costs.
It had been purchased with the proceeds of a $2.4 million compensation payout Ms Higgins was awarded by the Commonwealth in December 2022 for alleged bullying and victimisation in the wake of her coming forward with her rape allegation.
In June, a preliminary report published by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) found that there had been 'no corruption issue' with the compensation payment.
The NACC stated that the resolution of mediation after just a day of mediation was 'unexceptional' and revealed that Miss Higgins actually received less than the maximum amount recommended by external legal advice.
Reynolds, whos aid she was 'bitterly disappointed', with the finding had lodged the original complaint with the NACC in October 2023 over then-Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus's handling of the settlement.
'My primary concern has always been how the Commonwealth could possibly settle unsubstantiated and statute barred claims made against me, alleging egregious conduct on my part without taking a single statement from me or speaking to me at all,' Reynolds said after the NACC published its findings.
Senator Reynolds said she had expressed a desire to attend the mediation talks and, went that was denied, she was offered 'no opportunity to defend the serious an baseless allegations against' her.
'I fail to understand how the Commonwealth and its lawyers could not appreciate the serious and probable consequences of settling such serious allegations on my behalf, which included claims for gender-based discrimination, disability discrimination and victimisation and the message that it would send to the public about the truth of those matters,' Senator Reynolds added.
Senator Reynolds has also launched legal action against the Commonwealth over the compensation payment, alleging that government lawyers were 'hopelessly conflicted'.
The high-profile five-week defamation trial, which ended in September 2024, was just another twist in the never-ending saga which has engulfed the worlds of Australian politics, media and the law since a fateful night in March 2019.
It was then that Ms Higgins alleged she was raped by colleague Bruce Lehrmann in the Reynolds' ministerial suite.
A Federal Court judge overseeing a defamation case launched by Lehrmann against Network Ten found Ms Higgins was, on the balance of probabilities, raped by Lehrmann in the office.
Lehrmann is currently in the process of appealing that finding.