Channel Ten and Lisa Wilkinson clash over legal costs

- Advertisement -


- Advertisement -


Court documents have surfaced revealing further details of a dispute over legal costs.

Lisa Wilkinson has reportedly declined to provide detailed invoices for her high-profile legal team’s expenses, which have amounted to an astonishing $700,000 in less than eight months.

- Advertisement -

The dispute centres around Wilkinson’s claim against her employer, Network Ten, alleging that the network is not fulfilling its obligation to indemnify her in the defamation suit initiated by Bruce Lehrmann. This suit emerged following Wilkinson’s interview with Brittany Higgins on The Project in 2021, where Higgins accused Lehrmann of raping her in Parliament House, though he was not explicitly named as the assailant in the interview.

In February, Wilkinson engaged the services of renowned defamation barrister Sue Chrysanthou SC and Anthony Jefferies, a partner at Gillis Delaney Lawyers. This move was a deviation from Network Ten’s preferred legal firm, Thomson Geer. Wilkinson is contesting Network Ten’s refusal to cover two significant invoices for her legal representation — $353,538.88 in May and $370,017.00 in September.

Network Ten has expressed its dissatisfaction with Wilkinson’s decision to seek separate legal counsel, criticizing the costs as “not reasonably incurred.” The network contends, “(Network Ten) maintains its view that it is not necessary or reasonable for the plaintiff to be separately represented in the proceeding, such that the costs incurred by reason of that decision are not reasonably incurred.”

Contrastingly, Wilkinson argues that the network should bear these costs as they arise. However, Network Ten insists that payment should be a lump sum at the case’s conclusion, contingent on the reasonableness of the expenses. The network further claims a lack of a “complete record” of Chrysanthou’s invoices and criticizes the insufficient specificity in the billing details.

Notably, in a letter dated June 21, Network Ten’s legal team expressed preliminary doubts over the reasonableness of legal costs exceeding $375,000, given the limited progress in the case at that time. The letter stated,

“Substantial work undertaken on behalf of the plaintiff was unnecessarily duplicative of the defendant’s work in defending the proceeding.”

The latest hearing in the NSW Supreme Court revealed plans by Network Ten to transfer the case to the Federal Court, to be presided over by Justice Michael Lee, who is also handling Lehrmann’s defamation case against the network. The case is set to resume in court this Thursday.

- Advertisement -

SOURCE: The Australian

- Advertisement -

Know more about this or another Australian media story?

Contact the team anonymously at TV Blackbox

Kevin Perry
Kevin Perry
Senior Editor and Co-Owner of the TV Blackbox website, Kevin Perry is an experienced media commentator focused on TV Production, Consumer Tech, SVOD & Sports Broadcasting. Media enquiries please Call or Text 0428-275-111


  1. She was warned not to discuss Bruce Lehman by channel ten lawyers and she went against advice she should pay her own court costs .

  2. Can’t blame channel 10 for what comes out of this woman’s mouth I only hope that her lawyer has big bag to put all the money in as I hope it costs her a fortune

  3. Amazing she can say what she likes and have someone else foot the bill like the idiots on the ABC where we taxpayers end up paying!!

  4. Another lying parasite on TV. Just like the woman hating bastard at Channel Seven in Melbourne. Chief newsreader Peter Mitchell.

  5. Needs the big house. No room with a view though. She was quick to point the finger and was told not to. Her doing and hers alone. Liked the lime light though got an award 🥇 for it. Typical woke not my fault

  6. Channel 9 are so glad she walked out looking for more money they must pop champaign every day at lunch to celebrate their good fortune…!

  7. She is a low life scum why when outof her way to destroy the liberal party by using Higgins as a scape goat and should be in jail

  8. So ch10 are hangin her out to dry “you’re on your own sunshine”
    who would have expected that. Obviously she and the the bandit didn’t

  9. Lisa Wilkinson can easy afford seven hundred thousand for declamation law suit its bad to say channel 1o has to front her cost without putting brain in to gear about what she publicly came out and said at home she could say but not outside many people have suffered saying the wrong thing outside their home

  10. If miss Higgins is going to testify in this court case of defamation , then why wasn’t there a retrial after the first trial was dismissed over the juror bring stuff into the jurors room , she well enough to do it here , then she’s well enough to be put on the stand and testify on the rape case then , and as far as this journalist trash goes hope she has to pay the full amount for her big mouth


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Join or social media

- Advertisement -


THE REAL HOUSEWIVES OF SYDNEY manage to land Tokyo front and centre in a tardiness debate

Latest Stories