Lehrmann ordered to pay Network Ten $2 million in legal costs

"It might be the deal of the century, the $2 million, for all I know, your honour," Mr Lehrmann's lawyer, Paul Svilans, said on Thursday.

Although, at a case management hearing, the Federal Court's Justice Michael Lee said he was not so sure about that assertion.

In April, the judge found, to the civil standard of proof, Mr Lehrmann sexually assaulted then-colleague Brittany Higgins inside a Parliament House ministerial office in the early hours of March 23, 2019.

More than two months since Justice Lee's judgment, questions about costs between Mr Lehrmann and Ten were finally answered.

The television network revealed it was seeking an order for Mr Lehrmann to pay the lump sum of $2 million, significantly less than the more than $3.6 million Ten said it had paid in legal fees defending the civil suit.

"Those figures do not surprise me," Justice Lee said before ruling in Ten's favour.

He dismissed concerns from Mr Svilans about duplicated work done by Ten's lawyers and barrister Matthew Collins KC's $11,000 per court day fee being too high to be deemed recoverable.

Documents uploaded to the court on Thursday reveal Mr Collins charged Ten a total of $768,750 after representing the network in the defamation proceedings.

His junior counsel, Tim Senior, charged $407,900 for his time.

Mr Svilans, who appeared pro bono after his no-win-no-fee deal with Mr Lehrmann, noted his client neither consented to nor opposed the order sought by Ten.

The judge also noted the "high degree of unlikelihood" that Mr Lehrmann, whom he described as a "man of modest means", would actually be able to pay the substantial costs order.

"This has not resolved outstanding issues concerning costs between the respondents [Ten and Ms Wilkinson], nor has it resolved any liability Mr Lehrmann might have to Ms Wilkinson pursuant to the costs order," Justice Lee said.

After she was hung out to dry by her employer over a controversial Logies speech, Justice Lee previously found it was appropriate for Ms Wilkinson to hire counsel separate from Ten for last year's civil trial.

As a result, the network was ordered to cover Ms Wilkinson's reasonable legal costs. The court would later hear those costs amounted to more than $1.8 million.

The side costs issue also returned to court on Thursday, when Ten revealed it was willing to pay $607,850 in a "compromise position" to its former star presenter.

It then said the figure was recalculated to be $558,548.

The network did not seek a judgment be made for it to pay Ms Wilkinson that amount but indicated it was willing to pay it.

Court documents have previously revealed the journalist's high profile defamation barrister, Sue Chrysanthou SC, commanded $8000 a day for appearing in court.

A referee has been appointed to help determine the costs issue.

"I was hoping peace might break out, at least in part," Justice Lee said. "But anyway, it doesn't look like it's going to."

Late last month, Mr Lehrmann launched a notice to appeal Justice Lee's scathing civil judgment.

"Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins," the judge said in April.

The words handed Mr Lehrmann a decisive loss in his battle against Ten and Ms Wilkinson, who successfully argued a substantial truth defence but had their professionalism publicly called out.

The judge found the former Liberal staffer was not defamed by a 2021 The Project interview with Ms Higgins which aired her rape allegation.

The findings were made on the balance of probabilities, being the lower civil standard of proof, and do not amount to a criminal conviction.

It has since been widely reported Mr Lehrmann intends to legally represent himself in his appeal. He claims a "denial of procedural fairness", among other appeal grounds.

MORE DEFAMATION TRIAL COVERAGE:

It has also been revealed Ten is seeking the man put down $200,000 in costs security before those proceedings can even occur.

The network has asked the Federal Court to dismiss the appeal if he cannot pay the amount.

To add further drama to the never-ending saga, Ms Wilkinson is at the same time challenging Justice Lee's findings that her and her employer did not act reasonably in putting together the broadcast in question.

Among numerous challenges filed in the Full Court of the Federal Court, Ms Wilkinson said the judge should have found Mr Lehrmann was plainly aware Ms Higgins was not consenting.

Mr Lehrmann's criminal trial was aborted in late 2022 after juror misconduct and the charge of sexual intercourse without consent levelled at him dropped over concerns for Ms Higgins' mental health.