Brittany Higgins' husband David Sharaz fires off an angry message to a Women in Media event hosting Justice Michael Lee

Brittany Higgins' husband David Sharaz has demanded to know whether a Federal Court judge will mention Bruce Lehrmann's defamation case during a talk at a $495-per-head event.

Justice Michael Lee accepted an invitation to take part in a 'candid conversation' with former ABC chair Ita Buttrose at a Women in Media national conference on August 9.

According to the website, the session promises to offer 'profound insights' into the intersection of media and law, 'with a particular focus on themes of truth and trust'.

'Justice Michael Lee, known for his incisive handling of complex legal cases, and Ita Buttrose ... will explore critical issues affecting both the media and judicial landscapes,' an ad read. 

However, Mr Sharaz appeared concerned the focus of the event would turn to Lehrmann's high-profile defamation case in December, over which Justice Lee presided. 

Mr Sharaz was criticised in Justice Lee's judgment.

According to The Australian, Mr Sharaz fired off an angry message to organisers, asking: 'So he will not discuss the Lehrmann case for which he has made his name, and for which you're booking him for?'

Women in Media told Mr Sharaz that Justice Lee would be discussing the intersection of media, law and society, and there was no expectation that he would speak specifically about the Lehrmann case.

In April, Justice Lee handed down his findings in Lehrmann's defamation case against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson.

He found, on a balance of probabilities, that Lehrmann had raped his former colleague Ms Higgins in Parliament House in 2019, in much the way she described during an interview with Wilkinson on The Project in 2021.

In his judgement, Justice Lee found that Mr Sharaz had reinforced 'a conspiratorial and political theme' to Ms Higgins' rape claims.

'The articulation of the core aspects of this claim commenced shortly before Ms Higgins's boyfriend, Mr Sharaz, made the necessary arrangements for Ms Higgins to tell her account,' the judgment read.

In January 2020, Mr Sharaz sent Wilkinson an email with the attention-grabbing title 'Me Too, Liberal Party, Project Pitch' and immediately started telling her about a governmental conspiracy.

He wrote: 'I've got a sensitive story surrounding a sexual assault at Parliament House; a woman who was pressured by the Liberal Party and female cabinet minister not to pursue it. She's asked me to be the one to get the story told this year.'

He then sent her the timeline in an email titled 'everything you need', with yet another conspiracy claim.

'I'm sending this on behalf of Britt, purely because, and this sounds paranoid, we just don't know who might be keeping a close eye on her,' he wrote.

Wilkinson later referred to the situation as 'an extraordinary cover-up' involving Ms Higgins' former parliamentary bosses, senators Linda Reynolds and Michaelia Cash. 

Mr Sharaz handpicked Wilkinson as one of the two journalists for Ms Higgins to tell her story to and became a conduit between them, even co-authoring a timeline of her assault to deploy to the press gallery.

Justice Lee did not accept Ms Higgins' evidence that she wrote the document alone, partly because there were points where she was referred to in the third person.