Former Defence Minister Linda Reynolds has started bankruptcy actions against Brittany Higgins in the Federal Court. She is now trying to get those damages awarded her for defamation. Now Reynolds is seeking compensation, having already won her defamation case against Higgins and her husband, David Sharaz, in Perth last August. The court ruled that Higgins had defamed Reynolds through a lengthy and complex campaign of social media posts that began in 2022.
The $315,000 defamation judgment means that Higgins must pay Reynolds a total of $341,000 including $26,000 of interest. On top of that, she was required to pay 80 percent of Reynolds’s legal fees, over $1 million. Sharaz, who’s 66 and in poor health, was found liable by default in the case. Now he is exposed to personal liability of up to $220,000 in damages, plus other ancillary costs.
Bankruptcy Proceedings Initiated
After the court decision, Reynolds acted quickly. She had to file bankruptcy against Higgins in a futile attempt to enforce the court’s judgment given to her. The bankruptcy proceedings against Higgins are currently scheduled for a hearing before a Western Australia registrar in November.
The measures imposed on Sharaz are just as draconian. He has now been served bankruptcy summons by Reynolds and he needs to pay the debt in next 21 days. If not, then Reynolds will move forward to the formal application to bankrupt him.
“It is unfortunate that I have to take this step in this long-running saga. As I have said, this is conduct which comes as no surprise to me, however, what should be plain now is that I am committed to seeing this through to the end.” – Linda Reynolds
In reaction to the defamation judgement, Brittany Higgins filed an appeal on the final day allowed for doing so. This appeal further complicates this highly contentious, high stakes legal fight that has drawn enormous public interest. This appeal has the potential to make a lasting impact on the bankruptcy proceedings that are still unfolding. It helps to explain the complicated legal issues facing both sides.
Appeal Filed on Last Day
Higgins’s posts on social media have been at the heart of the complicated defamation case – leading to Reynolds’ initial lawsuit in the first place. The court’s ruling serves as a reminder of the very real ramifications that public commentary spread online can have on an individuals’ professional reputation.
Reynolds’ successful defamation action was led by a team of specialist barristers headed by Martin Bennett. Nonetheless, Reynolds was burdened with huge legal expenses as a result of the protracted nature of the proceedings. She took the case seriously, which increased those costs.
Legal Representation and Costs
The ruling and its aftermath have dire fiscal impacts. Now, Higgins and Sharaz will have to figure out a way to comply with their legal obligations going forward. Yet they are under incredible pressure from the court and public scrutiny. How they proceed will be critical in shaping how this divisive issue plays out in the coming months.
The financial implications of the ruling and subsequent actions raise significant questions about how Higgins and Sharaz will navigate their legal obligations moving forward. As they face mounting pressures from both the court and public scrutiny, their next steps will be critical in shaping the resolution of this contentious issue.
