Brittany Higgins’ Finances Revealed in Court

Brittany Higgins has less than $10,000 in assets, with the remainder of her multimillion-dollar Commonwealth allowance tied up in a managed trust fund.

The 29-year-old continues to defend herself against a defamation lawsuit from her former boss, Liberal Party senator Linda Reynolds. In the latest in a series of court cases on Wednesday, the politician won the right to access the trust’s records.

The former defence minister, who plans to retire at the next election, is suing Ms Higgins, seeking damages over a series of social media posts she says have damaged her reputation.

Before the August trial, the senator’s legal team on Wednesday won against Ms. Higgins’ legal team in a skirmish over access to Ms. Higgins’ trust documents.

The fund was established in late 2022 to manage the proceeds of a $2.4 million financial settlement with the federal government after it was alleged she was not supported by Senator Reynolds after Bruce Lehrmann allegedly raped her.

Senator Reynolds’ lawyer Martin Bennett told the High Court in Perth that his client wants the document to make clear who the administrator is and which laws from which jurisdiction are relevant.

It could lead to the senator taking further legal action to recover Ms Higgins’ trust funds before the verdict in the defamation case is handed down.

Brittany Higgins (pictured left next to her husband David Sharaz) has less than $10,000 in assets, with the remainder of her multimillion-dollar bequest to the Commonwealth tied up in a managed trust fund.

“(It) is probably the only way Senator Reynolds can get damages and costs if she is successful,” he told reporters outside court.

‘If you are financially unable to cover the costs and you have mortgaged your home to the rafters to pay for the lawsuit, then you should try to recover those costs as quickly as possible.’

During the hearing, the court was told that a June statement from Leon Zwier, one of Ms Higgins’ lawyers, showed her assets were less than $10,000.

“We know that Ms Higgins in fact has a fantastic lifestyle full of travel and events,” Mr Bennett said, setting out the reasons why his client wanted access to the trust deed.

Her lawyers opposed the filing, arguing that it was speculative, pointless, premature and unnecessary, as the Bankruptcy Act provided provisions that would allow the senator to access funds if she won the defamation case.

They also raised the tension created by Senator Reynolds’ concerns about whether the compensation Ms Higgins received should be repaid to the Commonwealth and her possible attempt to seek redress for this.

According to Senator Reynolds’ legal team, the trust was set up to protect Ms Higgins from future creditors, including the Commonwealth, Mr Lehrmann, Penguin Australia and herself.

Chief Justice Peter Quinlan said the name of the trust, Brittany Higgins Protective Trust, suggested it had been set up to protect her from something or someone. However, there was no direct evidence to support the senator’s claim.

He said it was intended to protect Ms Higgins from exploitation because of her ongoing health problems.

Senator Linda Reynolds is suing Brittany Higgins for defamation over a series of social media posts

However, Chief Justice Quinlan concluded that it was in the interests of justice that Senator Reynolds be given access to the trust documents.

He also said this may be the only way Senator Reynolds can get damages if she wins her defamation case, before pushing the parties to resolve their differences before trial.

“I don’t want to sound like King Canute trying to hold back the ocean,” he said.

‘It is not too late for these parties to take the resolution of all disputes between them into their own hands.’

Lehrmann denied raping Ms. Higgins, and that case ended in a mistrial. Prosecutors dropped the charges and ruled out a new trial due to concerns about Ms. Higgins’ mental health.

Judge Michael Lee ruled in April on civil standards that Lehrmann, on the balance of probabilities, raped Ms Higgins and dismissed his defamation action against Network Ten.