Page:Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Trial Judgment).pdf/49

 serious allegation against Ms Gain to dissimulate the true nature of his then attraction to Ms Higgins.

IIIThe Spotlight Detour

164 The conclusions expressed in the preceding section had been drafted prior to Easter Sunday when, less than four days prior to the notified date of delivery of this judgment, my Associate was contacted by the solicitors for Network Ten concerning an application to reopen, which I then listed and resolved as soon as practicable, after hours, the next business day.

165 Although the application was an unusual one and there is a need for caution in allowing a re-opening of the evidence after reservation except on well-founded grounds, I gave leave because: doing so was consistent with the authorities in relation to fresh evidence; the material was said to have some relevance to matters that went beyond the question of Mr Lehrmann's credit; and, moreover, its receipt would assist in ensuring this controversy was quelled, and be seen to have been quelled, on the basis of all admissible evidence the parties wished to adduce. Further, doing so would not cause any real delay (and hence be inimical to resolving justly this dispute quickly and efficiently).

166 Following the reopening, Mr Taylor Auerbach, a former Senior Producer on the Spotlight programme, was called to establish the propositions that:


 * (1) the extent of what might be described as collateral rewards given to Mr Lehrmann for his co-operation with the Seven Network was more extensive than had been previously stated; and


 * (2) contrary to: (a) assurances given by the solicitors for Mr Lehrmann to the solicitors for Network Ten; (b) assurances given to the Court by senior counsel for Mr Lehrmann acting on instructions; and (c) Mr Lehrmann's evidence before me, Mr Lehrmann provided materials to the makers of the Spotlight programme contrary to his subsisting legal obligations.

167 I deal with each topic below, but it is worth initially making two points.

168 First, Mr Auerbach accepted in cross-examination that he "hated" his former colleague and friend, Spotlight producer Mr Steve Jackson (blaming him, "in part", for the fact his contract at the Seven Network was not renewed) (T2786.35; T2788.45). Given his cast of mind, and his more general resentment as to how he was treated over the Spotlight programme, it is Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Trial Judgment) [2024] FCA 369