Page:Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Trial Judgment).pdf/289

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

reputation. The need for a substantial award of damages to satisfy the purpose of vindicating his reputation remains despite the settlements.

M.4Matters Relevant to Aggravated Damages

IThe Bases Pressed

1023 In considering aggravated damages, the Court is entitled to look at the whole of the conduct of a respondent from publication to the time of judgment and the applicant must establish that the respondent's conduct was improper, unjustifiable, or lacking in bona fides: Triggell v Pheeny (1951) 82 CLR 497 (at 513–514 per Dixon, Williams, Webb and Kitto JJ).

1024 The relevant grounds relied upon by Mr Lehrmann shifted somewhat. Five bases were eventually particularised at the conclusion of the evidence (which can be usefully summarised into three) being:

(1) the respondents were recklessly indifferent to the truth or falsity of the imputations in publishing the assertions and allegations giving rise to the imputations without giving Mr Lehrmann a reasonable opportunity to respond;
(2) the failure by the respondents to make reasonable efforts to contact Mr Lehrmann for comment and Mr Llewellyn cynically refraining from giving Mr Lehrmann a reasonable time to respond;
(3) the making of the Logies speech, "on behalf of, and/or with the approval and/or authority" of Network Ten, and Network Ten's "continuing public adherence to advice given by Ms Tasha Smithies, being Ten's Senior Litigation Counsel, to Ms Wilkinson in June 2022 to the effect that the speech should have been given" the "original provision of that advice and Ten's refusal to apologise for or retract that advice is unjustifiable" noting that "even if such advice had never been given, the conduct by all persons involved remains unjustifiable".

1025 I will make findings as to each of these bases in turn (and will separately deal with the consequences of these findings at Section M.6 below).

IIReckless Indifference to Truth of the Imputations

1026 Despite not articulating detailed submissions in support of this ground, Mr Lehrmann pleaded that Network Ten was recklessly indifferent to the truth or falsity of the imputations in


Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Trial Judgment) [2024] FCA 369
281