The 30-year-old suffered a bruising own-goal after suing Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson for defamation over an interview with Ms Higgins on The Project in 2021.
Justice Michael Lee in April 2024 found Ms Higgins' claims that Lehrmann had raped her inside Parliament House in 2019 were established on the balance of probabilities.
Lehrmann appealed the finding during a two-day hearing in August, arguing the judge had erred in finding Ten and Ms Wilkinson had legally justified the imputation of rape.
On Wednesday, the Full Court of the Federal Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original ruling.
"The court has found the primary judge did not err in any of the ways alleged by Mr Lehrmann," Justice Michael Wigney said.
Lehrmann did not appear in court for the decision and was instead represented by his lawyer Zali Burrows.
He is expected to apply for special leave to appeal the Full Court decision in the High Court.
The appeal judges on Wednesday dismissed Ms Burrows' arguments that Lehrmann was denied procedural fairness because Justice Lee's factual findings differed from the case run by Ten.
She argued during the appeal that Lehrmann had been "taken by surprise" that the judge found he committed a "non-violent rape" the was not put to him in cross-examination.
But the ruling depicted a violent rape, Ten's lawyer Matt Collins KC argued, labelling the suggestion that Lehrmann may have given different testimony as "astonishing".
He said Lehrmann had been quizzed on the main facts of the case found by Justice Lee: that sex took place, Ms Higgins did not consent, and Lehrmann had been reckless as to her consent.
"The sting of the (defamatory) imputation resides in the act of intercourse without consent, not in any detail of it," Dr Collins told the appeal hearing.
The appeal judges - one of whom had expressed confusion about the term "non-violent rape" - dismissed Ms Burrows arguments and reaffirmed the ruling by Justice Lee.
The definition of rape used by the judge in his decision became an issue during the appeal hearing, with Ms Burrows arguing it was inconsistent with an ordinary person's understanding.
For their part, Ten and Ms Wilkinson urged the appeal judges to find that Lehrmann was not only reckless to Ms Higgins' consent - as Justice Lee found - but knew she didn't consent.
However, the Full Court found that the definition of rape used by Justice Lee fell within the ordinary meaning of rape.
They rejected Ms Burrows' claims that Lehrmann would be entitled to more than $20,000 in damages if his appeal is successful because he has become a "national joke" as a result of the allegation.
Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins when he knew she was seriously intoxicated, continued raping her when she became aware, and left her in a state of undress, Dr Collins told the court.
"That is not a man with any reputation in respect of sexual morality that would warrant compensation," he said.
The appeal loss means Lehrmann - who is verging on bankruptcy - could be forced to pay $2 million in damages to Ten and Ms Wilkinson, as originally directed by Justice Lee.
Lehrmann has continued to deny he sexually assaulted Ms Higgins in 2019, and a criminal case against him in 2022 was abandoned without any findings against him.
In his headline-grabbing decision in April 2024, the judge quipped: "Having escaped the lions' den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat."
1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732)
National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028
22°C