How Bruce Lehrmann gave up a chance to settle with Channel Ten - and instead was named as a rapist by a judge and left homeless and jobless

Network Ten offered to settle defamation action with Bruce Lehrmann before the matter went to trial, but he refused. 

Costs submissions released by the Federal Court on Tuesday show the network presented Lehrmann with a settlement offer in August 2023.

Ten had wanted the proceedings dismissed with no admission of liability, and without the network having to cover his legal costs.

Lehrmann was given until September 15 to consider the offer, but he rejected it within two hours.

According to Lehrmann's submission, he rejected the offer because it did not give him an 'opportunity for vindication' and there was no suggestion of an apology.

The matter went to trail before Justice Michael Lee in December.

Last Monday, Justice Lee found on a balance of probabilities that Lehrmann had raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in 2019. 

Ten's submissions did not say how much money it offered Lehrmann to settle the matter out of court, but it is now requesting all costs from August last year.

The document said: 'Mr Lehrmann brought this proceeding on a deliberately wicked and calculated basis.'

'He put Network Ten to the cost of defending this proceeding, which can be, with the benefit of hindsight, described as a clear abuse of process aimed at concealing the truth that Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins.'

Lehrmann sued Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson over an episode of The Project in February 2021, during which Ms Higgins went public with her rape claims for the first time.

He was not named in the broadcast but said friends and colleagues were able to identify him as her alleged rapist. 

During the judgement last week, Justice Lee found Lehrmann was identifiable from the broadcast, but he was not defamed because Ms Higgins rape claims were found to be true on a balance of probabilities.

Lehrmann had maintained he did not rape Ms Higgins. 

In his submission, Lehrmann said allegation of rape was serious enough to warrant the need for vindication and an apology - neither of which was part of Ten's settlement offer.

He has also requested compensation, stating the network's qualified privilege defence was 'bound to fail'.

The qualified privilege defence meant the network had to prove it acted reasonably and Ms Higgins allegations were a matter of public interest. 

However, the judge found the network did not research Ms Higgins' allegations properly before putting them to air in 2021.

Lehrmann said in his submission: 'It was their case that they had acted reasonably in publishing The Project broadcast.'

'In short, none of the qualified privilege defences were successful.'

'Given this court's findings as to the failure of those defences and the fundamental missteps taken by the respondents in publishing The Project broadcast it is open to this court to conclude that the applicant should be compensated for the time and expense in having to establish that the qualified privilege defences were bound to fail.'