Getty
Western Australian senator Linda Reynolds’ court case against her former staffer, Brittany Higgins, is entering its final week. After five weeks in WA’s Supreme Court, the case, in which Reynolds is suing Higgins for defamation, is wrapping up.
Below, we breakdown everything you need to know about the defamation case and the events leading up to it.
Why Is Linda Reynolds Suing Brittany Higgins and David Sharaz?
Linda Reynolds sued Brittany Higgins and her husband, David Sharaz, claiming that social media posts shared by the couple were defamatory and damaged her reputation.
In March 2019, Brittany Higgins was working for Reynolds—then Australia’s Defence Industry Minister—when she claimed to have been sexually assaulted by fellow political staffer Bruce Lehrmann in Reynolds’ office. Lehrmann, who denied the accusations, was then charged with sexual assault, but the criminal case was dismissed due to juror misconduct. (Lehrmann later lost a defamation trial against Lisa Wilkins and Channel 10, with the judge ruling it was “more likely than not” he had raped Higgins. Lehrmann has since lodged an appeal.)
It is ensuing public commentary shared on Twitter (now X) and Instagram by Higgins and Sharaz that Reynolds claims is both false and defamatory, and that the posts painted her as an unsupportive boss. Reynolds alleges the actions of Higgins and Sharaz—including the social media posts, organising an interview on The Project, and allegedly feeding questions to Labor politicians to target her in parliament—equate to proof that the two “agreed on a common design for the sole or dominant purpose of causing injury to her”. Higgins denies the claims, arguing that she was truthful in her social media posts. In April, it was reported that Sharaz would not contest Reynolds’ claims against him.
Reynolds is asking Higgins to pay for damages and legal costs and also not make any further similar statements.
Reynolds Vs. Higgins: The Defamation Trial
After multiple failed attempts to settle outside of the courtroom, the case is now taking place before the Western Australian Supreme Court.
During the trial, Reynolds gave a five-day testimony and claimed to to have become a “Like a fairground punching clown”. ABC News reports that Reynolds detailed feeling like she was portrayed as the villain and unsupportive boss.
Higgins, who is now pregnant, chose not to testify. However, her lawyer has presented a defence case on the grounds that she was telling the truth. She’s also seeking to defend the claim on qualified privilege, which relates to publications of public interests where the defendant has acted reasonably and fair comment.
Closing arguments are expected to be held on Monday, September 2, 2024.
Related stories
Native ad body.
Native ad body.
Native ad body.
