He claims that he was told by NACC officers at the time that he would be entitled to “funding for legal representation throughout the NACC process”, and that he has incurred substantial legal costs in reliance on that assurance.
He says it is “well established” that he is in “serious financial peril” and alleges the NACC and the Commonwealth “appear recklessly indifferent” to the damaging effect the watchdog’s processes have on former political staffers “when frivolous allegations are advanced”.
Lehrmann also claims he has been questioned in relation to a second NACC investigation, and that he continues to be represented by a senior barrister and a solicitor in relation to both investigations “as they have not been finalised”.
Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer Zali Burrows, pictured at the Federal Court in October.Credit: Edwina Pickles
Lehrmann’s lawyer, Zali Burrows, confirmed last year that her client’s home had been raided by the NACC on June 5.
Lehrmann was employed by then-defence industry minister Linda Reynolds in 2019 and claimed in his defamation case against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson that he was involved in work relating to “the French submarine contract” that was later cancelled in favour of the AUKUS deal with the United States and Britain.
The NACC and the Commonwealth have yet to file a response to Lehrmann’s application in court.
Loading
In a separate fight, Lehrmann has asked the Full Court of the Federal Court to overturn his damning defamation loss, including the central finding by Justice Michael Lee that he raped his then-colleague Brittany Higgins in 2019 in Reynolds’ Parliament House office.
Burrows said in submissions to the Full Court last month that her client’s failed defamation case was a “quasi-criminal trial” and the presiding judge had insufficient evidence to find the former federal Liberal staffer was a rapist.
In his decision last year, Lee was satisfied Ten and Wilkinson had proven to the civil standard – on the balance of probabilities – that Lehrmann raped Higgins. Lehrmann has always maintained his innocence.
Burrows said in written submissions filed in the defamation appeal that “where the evidence is inadequate, it may simply not be possible to judge the likelihood that something happened reliably enough to reach a rational conclusion one way or the other on the balance of probabilities”.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
