Bruce Lehrmann has cleared a critical legal hurdle in his bid to overturn sexual assault findings made against him, with a court now set to hear his appeal.
Justice Wendy Abraham delivered her judgement on two applications on Wednesday, the result of which appears to have determined whether Mr Lehrmann can appeal scathings civil findings made in April.
Most crucially, the man will not have to put down money he doesn't have for proceedings to go ahead.
The judge said the impact of denying Mr Lehrmann the right to appeal the "extremely serious" findings was "self-evident".
Mr Lehrmann unsuccessfully sued Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson in a month-long civil trial held last year.
The Federal Court found he was not defamed by a television broadcast because he had, on the civil balance of probabilities, raped Brittany Higgins inside a Parliament House ministerial office.
Last week, Justice Abraham heard conflicting applications from parties involved in the ensuing appeal proceedings.
Mr Lehrmann's application asked the court to stay an order forcing him to pay $2 million of Ten's legal costs as a result of his failed action.
Ten's application asked the court to order Mr Lehrmann to put down approximately $200,000 as a costs security before his appeal could be heard.
Being forced to pay the latter amount of money, the court was previously told, would effectively stifle the Liberal staffer turned unemployed university student's bid to overturn the findings.
On Wednesday morning, Justice Abraham briefly appeared on the bench to dismiss Ten's application and stay the $2 million order.
The judge also ordered the television network to pay Mr Lehrmann's legal fees in relation to the two applications.
In her judgement, Justice Abraham said speculation about the prospects of the man's appeal success was inappropriate.
"Any consideration of the merits of the appeal could not be undertaken on the scant material before the court in these applications," she said.
"Consequently, I approach the consideration of the application on the basis that there are arguable grounds of appeal."
The man's latest lawyer, Zali Burrows, had accused Ten of using bullying tactics after her cash-strapped client was reportedly served with a bankruptcy notice in August.
Mr Lehrmann is so unemployable after the rape findings, the court heard, "the only shot he'd ever have of making money would be going on OnlyFans, or something silly like that".
Ms Burrows previously argued there was a strong public interest in allowing the appeal while barristers for the television network and Ms Wilkinson said Mr Lehrmann had already had his day in court.
Matthew Collins KC, representing Ten, has described some of Mr Lehrmann's appeal grounds as "hopeless" and others as "faintly arguable".
"This is a man [who] on no view of it does he have the finances to conduct the appeal," Dr Collins said last week.
But in her decision, Justice Abraham said it was not as simple as Mr Lehrmann having had his day in court going against his public interest argument.
That is because Justice Michael Lee's judgement included adverse findings against all parties involved in the defamation trial and they have all subsequently claimed that judgement contains errors.
"That [Ten and Ms Wilkinson] do so by raising notices of contention rather than a cross-appeal does not alter the character of the allegations in the notices, even though they do not fall for determination unless the appellant establishes his appeal," Justice Abraham said.
"In all the circumstances, I do not accept the respondents' submissions that there is no public interest, in the relevant sense, in the appeal."
Mr Lehrmann's appeal grounds include that the trial judge could not have upheld Ten's substantial truth defence.
Parties are set to return to court next month for case management. Justice Abraham foreshadowed court availability in March next year for the multi-day appeal hearing.
Justice Lee's defamation judgement delivered in April was made to a civil standard and does not amount to a criminal conviction.
Mr Lehrmann's ACT criminal trial was aborted in 2022 following juror misconduct and the charge of sexual intercourse without consent levelled at him dropped over concerns for Ms Higgins' mental health.
