Linda Reynolds vs Brittany Higgins defamation case: Higgins wanted Parliament changed, lawyer claims

Brittany Higgins wanted to bring change to Parliament House — not bring down Linda Reynolds and the Morrison government — when she went public with her rape allegation in 2021, WA’s Supreme Court has been told.

In what could be the penultimate day of the high-stakes defamation case brought by the WA Senator against her former staff member, Ms Higgins’ barrister Rachael Young continued her closing submissions.

And she began the day with more blunt argument about one of the Senator’s key claims — that Ms Higgins was out to ruin her former boss when she went public, as part of a plan cooked up with her now husband David Sharaz.

Ms Young said the evidence simply did not back up that claim.

“We say that evidence establishes that Miss Higgins’ motivational purpose was not anywhere close to what is put by the Senator with respect to an improper motive to immediately cause political damage,” Ms Young said.

“What the evidence establishes is that Ms Higgins’ motivation or purpose was to call out the perpetrator of her sexual assault, as well as the way that she was treated afterwards.

“She felt she had a moral responsibility to protect other people, particularly women in the workplace.

“She was motivated to achieve reform with respect to employee protections in Parliament House, corroborated by her subsequent activism.”

As an example, Ms Young revealed a text exchange between Ms Higgins and Sam Maiden, the journalist behind the original story, published hours before the bombshell interview with The Project.

On February 19, 2021, Ms Maiden messaged her asking: “Do you think (Ms Reynolds) should resign or not?”

“Fully off the record. I don’t think so. I think she was just following instructions, to be honest,” was Ms Higgins’ reply.

“That reveals Miss Higgins’ honest and truthful thought — she didn’t think the senator ought to resign,” Ms Young said.

“And further, any such alleged desire to bring down the Morrison government or Senator Reynolds is inconsistent with all the other steps that Miss Higgins took in respect of workplace reform … including actively meeting with the then prime minister (Scott Morrison).”

The court was told that the allegation of a plan was “bold and perhaps surprising”, given Ms Higgins “had long associations with the Liberal Party, had campaigned for them and described Mr Morrison’s win as absolute elation.”

The court was told again that the allegation of a plan was “bold and perhaps surprising”, given Ms Higgins “had long associations with the Liberal Party, had campaigned for them and described Mr Morrison’s win as absolute elation.”

Ms Young pointed out that the Senator did not sue Ms Higgins on the bombshell publications in 2021 – by Ms Maiden and then on The Project.

She said the other defamation actions the Senator had taken and settled — including against publisher Harper Collins and the ACT Government — should mean any potential damages in this case should be downgraded, or discarded altogether.

In concluding her closing remarks, Ms Young honed in on Ms Higgins’ ‘agency’.

The agency she insists she didn’t have when she was raped, and in the aftermath. Which she seized when she went public in 2021.

And which she was now being sued for.

“Senator Reynolds’ approach to discharging her duty of care to Ms Higgins was to invoke Ms Higgins’ agency,” Ms Young said.

“But Ms Higgins had no agency when she was raped on March 23, 2019 on the couch in Senator Reynolds’ private office.

“She had little agency when, as a 24 year old, recent employee … she met with her boss and her chief of staff around a table, near the couch where she was found undressed and where the rape occurred.

“She had no agency when she started to speak about her experience, and was told by the Senator that she was not the right person to speak to this about.

“She had no agency when she found herself relocated to Perth for the duration of the election campaign, absent of her support network.

“She seized that agency, though, when she decided to speak up about her experience in 2021.

“And in the spirit of recognising that agency, on day 18 of this trial, I’m finally going to stop using my words — and I’m going to use hers.”

Ms Young then quoted Ms Higgins’ words said after her meeting with then Prime Minister Scott Morrison in April 2021.

“From the outset, I have been driven by my desire to ensure that no other person would have to go through the trauma that I experienced during my time in Parliament House,” Ms Higgins said then.

Ms Young concluded today: “That’s why she spoke up. That’s what she’s being sued about – and that’s why we say this action should be totally dismissed.”

The senator is suing her former staffer Ms Higgins — who is defending the claim — over social media posts the ex-defence minister believes damaged her reputation.

During closing submissions on Monday, WA’s Supreme Court was told the Senator tried to help Bruce Lehrmann during his criminal trial for allegedly raping Brittany Higgins in Parliament House.

Ms Young told a Perth court the senator communicated with Mr Lehrmann’s defence Steve Whybrow before and during his aborted criminal trial.

“What those 21 messages show is the senator’s partisan attitude in favour of the accused,” she told the WA Supreme Court on Monday during her closing submissions.

Ms Young said Senator Reynolds gave Mr Whybrow suggestions for potential witnesses and phone numbers to contact them.

“They engaged in fairly informal conversation, including Mr Whybrow’s reference to ‘s...s going to get real soon’ and ‘karma comes to those who wait’,” she said.

Ms Young said the senator sent Mr Whybrow a photographic comparison between Ms Higgins and the Princess of Wales.

“On her own admission, this was a bit catty and intemperate and as she confessed when I tried to explore the reasons for this message or what this message meant, she accepted it doesn’t make great rational sense,” she said.

“What it does demonstrate, though, is the senator got comfortable enough with Mr Whybrow to display that annoyance to him about Ms Higgins’ outfit.”

Ms Young said the senator was also signalling to Mr Whybrow that she might have other information that could help Mr Lehrmann.

“The senator’s text can be only sensibly described as attempting to assist the accused,” she said, explaining Ms Higgins’ justification and truth defence for an Instagram story in July 2023 that alleged the senator engaged in questionable conduct during Mr Lehrmann’s criminal trial.

Ms Young said it amounted to questionable conduct “because the senator was at pains to say she had a position of neutrality” and “didn’t pick sides between her two former employees at the time of the criminal trial”.

Mr Lehrmann denies raping Ms Higgins in Senator Reynolds’ ministerial suite in 2019 and his criminal trial in October 2022 was derailed by juror misconduct.

The defamation trial continues on Tuesday with Ms Young continuing closing submissions on behalf of Ms Higgins.

with AAP.