Brittany Higgins appeared timid and nervous before revealing during cross-examination that she had received $2.3 million in compensation from the federal government — and personally pocketed $1.9 million.
It would have been clear to Ms Higgins, who had many opportunities to explain in detail how much she paid for the personal injury claim, that she was detonating a political bomb.
She reached a settlement with the government in December last year, just one day after the criminal trial against Bruce Lehrmann collapsed, but the amount she received was never disclosed because the Albanian government claimed it was 'confidential'.
Questions were repeatedly asked by media and coalition members about how much she received and why it was paid when the allegations were unproven.
It soon became clear that the amount might never be released, and Mrs. Higgins grew tired of the speculation.
2GB presenter Ben Fordham reported in February that the damages were 'significantly higher than $3 million', and Ms Higgins fired back at X, threatening 'legal action' against media outlets that continued to report the amount.
She did not correct the figure. Instead, she wrote, “This headline is simply wrong.”
Brittany Higgins is photographed outside court on Tuesday with her best friend Emma Webster (left) and her fiancé David Sharaz (back) and lawyer Leon Zwier (right)
Brittany Higgins leaves Federal Court in Sydney on Tuesday
'I started the legal procedure with the coalition government at the beginning of 2022. The settlement was well below the reported figure the media went with – let alone above?
“I will have to take legal action against the media,” she said.
It is unclear how she planned to pursue legal action, as it is neither illegal to publish speculative figures on an issue such as this nor defamatory.
And during Mr Lehrmann's defamation proceedings in the Federal Court on Tuesday, we found that Fordham's report wasn't far off the mark.
Mr Lehrmann's lawyer concluded cross-examination of Ms Higgins with questions about the compensation payment – and she appeared to try to dodge the issue.
Lisa Wilkinson's lawyer Sue Chrysanthou objected to the question twice, but Judge Michael Lee said: “I will allow it.”
Mr Whybrow then asked whether Ms Higgins had received more than $2 million.
“It has been widely reported that you received over $2 million as a result of the outcome of that mediation, is that correct?” asked Mr Whybrow.
“Is that what was reported?”, Ms. Higgins responded.
'Yes, I have received money from the Commonwealth. They came to the conclusion that there was a shortcoming in the duty of care. And they paid me,” she said.
Mr Whybrow said: 'I asked you if it was more than $2 million.'
In February, Ms Higgins threatened legal action against media outlets that incorrectly reported her compensation claim
She tried to explain that the offer and what she got were different, except for taxes and legal fees.
Mr Whybrow became defiant. It was clear what he was asking, but she didn't answer the question.
“How much money did the Commonwealth pay you to prevent you from litigating this case?” he asked.
“I received $1.9 million,” Ms. Higgins replied.
“So you have no idea what your legal costs were or what the gross settlement amount was?” asked Mr Whybrow.
“I think it was about $2.3 million. I think it was the amount and then those taxes and then the lawyer took some, but I'm not sure what those costs were. I was never focused on that compensation. It was only what I received that I cared about.”
The stakes for Mr. Lehrmann are high: If it turns out that he most likely did not rape Ms. Higgins, he could receive compensation and regain his reputation.
For the federal government, the stakes are even higher.
If Mr Lehrmann wins, Labor will have to answer questions about why millions of taxpayers' money was handed over to someone whose allegations – on the balance of probabilities – turned out to be false.
Bruce Lehrmann is pictured outside the Federal Court on Tuesday
Significant claims against the Commonwealth can only be resolved with the consent of the Attorney General, currently Mark Dreyfus, according to the Legal Services Directions.
Finance Minister Katy Gallagher – whose department paid the sum – also came under fire during Question Time in June when she was accused of knowing about Ms Higgins' allegations before they were published on news.com.au and aired on The Project in February 2021.
In June 2021, she told the Senate that she had “no knowledge whatsoever” of the allegations before they were published and broadcast.
In June this year, she admitted having some prior information but insisted she was 'unaware of the full allegations' before they were broadcast. However, she would not say whether she had a transcript of the interview before it aired.
She insisted that answering that question would betray Ms Higgins' trust.
However, Ny Breaking Australia subsequently revealed that it appeared to have read the full transcript of Ms Higgins' television interview – four days before the program aired.
On February 11, 2021 at 7:10 PM, Mr Sharaz texted Ms Higgins: “Katy Gallagher messaged me. She is angry and wants to help. She has the context. Says they knew something was wrong because they fired Bruce and not you. They avoided a scandal.”
Katy Gallagher (pictured) has blasted the coalition over its handling of Ms Higgins' complaints
Mrs Higgins replied: 'Can I see her message?'
Mr Sharaz said: 'Yes! I gave her [The Project] interview for context. I hope that's okay? She doesn't do anything with it. But I'm also happy to get out and let her talk to you if you want.
“I actually wanted her to understand all the context, because it's so complicated.”
It also appeared that Mr Sharaz and Ms Higgins had planned all along to get help from Ms Gallagher.
Mr Sharaz, Ms Higgins, Lisa Wilkinson and Ten producer Angus Llewellyn had a five-hour recorded meeting in January 2021, a few weeks before The Project episode aired.
At that meeting the group discussed whether they had “friendly MPs” to test the then Morrison government, and Mr Sharaz said: “I have a friend in Labor, Katy Gallagher from the Labor side, who will investigate and pursue it. to go'.
'This week the story comes out that they have to answer questions in Question Time, it's a mess for them. That's why Britt chose that timeline,” he said.
It was then revealed that Mr Sharaz invited Katy Gallagher to his wedding to his ex-wife in 2018. However, she did not attend.
Brittany Higgins is pictured on the left on the day the rape trial against Bruce Lehrmann was thrown out last October
Ms Higgins' settlement was reached in December last year, just one day after the criminal trial against Bruce Lehrmann collapsed, but the figure was never disclosed because the Albanian government claimed it was 'confidential'.
The compensation was based on her claims that she was not supported by her former bosses, Linda Reynolds and Michaelia Cash, after she disclosed her rape allegations to them.
They both deny failing to support Ms Higgins.
Her claims were for general damages, past economic loss and assistance with future domestic duties, and future economic loss based on claims that she would be unable to work in politics for 40 years.
On Tuesday, Mr Whybrow asked Ms Higgins if she understood that part of the claim was that she would 'not be able to work effectively for the rest of your life?'.
Mrs. Higgins replied, “I think it was forty years.”
She stepped from the witness stand Tuesday afternoon, concluding her cross-examination.
Mrs. Higgins seemed relieved.
The hearing will continue on Wednesday.