Former elite soldier Ben Roberts-Smith is yet to publicly address last week's court ruling that he committed war crimes in Afghanistan, with the judge's full conclusions to be released today.
Justice Anthony Besanko on Thursday dismissed Mr Roberts-Smith's defamation suit against newspapers owned by Nine Entertainment, finding reports of murder and bullying had been substantiated.
His judgement was only an abridged version, however, in light of a Commonwealth application to inspect the written document due to national security concerns.
Pending any further delay, it is anticipated to be published before 2pm on Monday.
Mr Roberts-Smith, a former Special Air Services Regiment (SAS) patrol commander, is yet to comment on the decision.
The Victoria Cross recipient was in Bali on judgement day. He has since resigned from an executive role with Seven West Media.
His lawyer has not returned ABC requests for a statement on his behalf.
Matt Collins KC, a barrister and media law expert, has said he expects Justice Besanko's written reasons to be "meticulous" in outlining the evidence heard during the 13-month trial.
"This will be a very long judgement," he said.
"It will be open to Ben Roberts-Smith and his team to pore over the reasons and see whether there are potential grounds for challenging it."
Justice Besanko last week found four allegations of unlawful killings during Mr Roberts-Smith's tours of Afghanistan had been shown to be "substantially true".
The judge also ruled the articles, published in 2018, had accurately reported Mr Roberts-Smith's assault of an Afghan civilian and bullying of an SAS colleague.
Other claims, including the alleged abuse of his mistress, were not proven but Justice Besanko ruled they were covered by the defence of contextual truth.
"In light of my conclusions, each proceeding must be dismissed," he said.
His decision has sparked debate over whether Mr Roberts-Smith, 44, should be stripped of his military honours.
Arthur Moses SC, Mr Roberts-Smith's barrister, briefly spoke outside court to say the full judgement will be reviewed to inform any appeal.
Thursday's judgement was described as a "vindication" of investigative journalism, while law experts have labelled Mr Roberts-Smith's decision to bring defamation action a spectacular "own goal".
The army veteran is not charged with any criminal offences, and has maintained his innocence.
A joint investigation by the Office of the Special Investigator and Australian Federal Police is probing reports of war crimes by Australian soldiers in Afghanistan between 2005 and 2016.
It follows the landmark Brereton Report, which in 2020 found "credible information" existed detailing alleged breaches of the rules of combat.
Senior media lawyer Justin Quill told ABC's The Drum last week that he didn't believe the Federal Court ruling would influence any criminal investigations.
He said the burden of proof Nine had to meet in its defence sat somewhere between "the normal civil standard and the criminal standard".
"Criminal charges might occur, but they won't occur as a result of — or because of — this judgement," he said.
"This judgement is a civil judgement, a civil decision only.
"No doubt the authorities will be looking at the evidence given in this case, but it won't influence their decision to charge or not charge Ben Roberts-Smith or any other soldier for that matter."
