Bruce Lehrmann rejected an offer to "walk away" from his eventually unsuccessful civil suit months before his highly-publicised defamation trial.
Mr Lehrmann's chance to escape what would become a devastating rebuke of his conduct and a finding of his guilt, to the civil standard of proof, was revealed on Tuesday through Federal Court documents.
In doing so, the judge handed the journalists who reported the allegation a significant victory.
Network Ten is now arguing Mr Lehrmann should cover all of the network's legal costs after he brought the proceeding against it "on a deliberately wicked and calculated basis" and rejected the settlement offer.
"He put Network Ten to the cost of defending this proceeding, which can be, with the benefit of hindsight, described as a clear abuse of process aimed at concealing the truth," lawyers for Ten wrote in costs submissions to the court.
Who will pay?
A costs hearing has been set down for Wednesday next week.
"On 31 August 2023, the respondents made a 'walk away' offer of compromise to Mr Lehrmann," Ten's lawyers wrote.
The terms of that offer, made about three months before the civil trial began, were the proceedings be dismissed without admission of liability and no order relating to costs be made.
Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson successfully defended Mr Lehrmann's case against them and a 2021 The Project interview on a substantial truth defence.
They failed on a qualified privilege defence after Justice Lee found they had not acted reasonably in publishing the television broadcast.
Ten has argued rejecting the offer in question was unreasonable for several reasons.
"Mr Lehrmann knew at all times that he was prosecuting this proceeding on the basis of a lie, and that if the truth came out at trial, the proceeding was bound to fail," Ten's lawyers wrote.
Ten also said the offer came after the exchange of evidence, including 21 affidavits and outlines of evidence or expert reports.
"It must have been apparent to Mr Lehrmann, as at the date of the offer, that the chickens were coming home to roost," the lawyers wrote.
"The terms of the offer were in no way ambiguous, and the offer letter explicitly foreshadowed that an application for indemnity costs would be made in the event that the offer was rejected."
Lawyers for Mr Lehrmann also addressed the "walk away" offer in their costs submissions to the court.
"An important consideration for this court however is the seriousness of the allegation published and the need for vindication, which an acceptance of the 'walk away' offer would not bring," they said.
"No apology was provided as part of the offer."
Mr Lehrmann's lawyers claim their client had the potential for a successful costs order and accepting the offer would have meant no compensation at all.
"Even though the respondents have established the substantial truth of the allegation it does not mean the applicant, acting reasonably, should have appreciated that the proceeding was hopeless from the date of the letter," the lawyers wrote.
Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson "still bore the onus" at the time of the offer and it was not unreasonable for Mr Lehrmann to continue pursuing his suit, the court was told.
The former Liberal staffer's lawyers also asked the court to consider compensating Mr Lehrmann for time and costs relating to the failed qualified privilege defence.
Mr Lehrmann has reportedly not worked since 2021 and he is unlikely to have the means to cover the substantial legal costs that are being sought.
