Former Victorian Premier Denies Defamation Allegations in Federal Court
Former Victorian premier Daniel Andrews and his wife Catherine have officially denied defaming Ryan Meuleman, the teenage boy who suffered serious injuries in a bicycle collision with their car thirteen years ago. The couple broke their prolonged silence by lodging their formal defence with the Federal Court of Australia, responding to a lawsuit filed by Mr Meuleman in December last year.
Legal Battle Over Media Statement
Mr Meuleman alleged that online trolls labelled him a 'grifter' following the couple's joint media statement in September 2024, which described a review into the collision as the result of 'appalling conspiracy theories'. However, the Andrews firmly contest these claims, asserting they have not defamed Mr Meuleman. Furthermore, they argue that even if their statement caused serious harm to his reputation, they themselves were subjected to a media witch hunt, which could potentially mitigate any alleged damages.
In their defence documents, seen by the Daily Mail, the Andrews allege that since at least 2022, Mr Meuleman has 'sought to court public and media attention and publicity in relation to the collision'. They further claim he attempted to 'inflict reputational damage on the respondents' and 'advance the personal or political agendas of members of the Meuleman Cohort'.
'It is to be inferred that Mr Meuleman commenced this proceeding or is maintaining this proceeding in whole or in part for one or more of the following collateral purposes, rather than to seek vindication of his reputation or a solatium for injured feelings,' the defence states. The couple also alleges Mr Meuleman is using the defamation proceeding to 'seek evidence (including via cross-examination of the respondents) for use... in a private criminal prosecution against the respondents'.
Background of the 2013 Collision
The incident occurred on January 7, 2013, in the seaside town of Blairgowrie, when Mr Andrews was Victorian opposition leader. The Ford Territory SUV carrying him, his wife, and their three children collided with Ryan Meuleman, then aged 15, while he was cycling. Mr Andrews informed police that his wife Catherine was driving and had come to a 'complete stop' before she 'turned right from a stationary position' when the teenager hit the car's side.
Ryan, now 27, was airlifted to the Royal Children's Hospital with life-threatening injuries, including a punctured lung, broken ribs, a ruptured spleen, and internal bleeding. According to a Federal Court statement of claim, Mr Meuleman 'continues to suffer pain from the injuries he sustained as a result of the collision' and 'continues to suffer from significant symptoms of depression, anxiety and traumatisation'.
Disputed Review and Media Fallout
The court documents claim the Andrews 'impliedly admitted' via their lawyers that their press release comments were in response to a media article highlighting a review of the collision by Raymond Shuey, the former Assistant Commissioner for Traffic Operations. Dr Shuey reviewed the collision and prepared a report for Mr Meuleman's 2023 Supreme Court legal battle against his former law firm Slater and Gordon, which he alleged had failed to act in his best interest.
The Andrews' September 2024 statement read: 'This so-called report was commissioned by lawyers on behalf of their clients [sic] who are seeking money through the courts by suing their former lawyers. We are not a party to this legal action. We did nothing wrong. This matter has already been comprehensively and independently investigated and closed by Victoria Police and integrity agencies. We will not dignify these appalling conspiracy theories by commenting further at this time.'
Mr Meuleman, whose dispute with Slater and Gordon was settled for an undisclosed amount, claimed the Andrews accused him of 'lying about the facts and circumstances of the collision' and defamed him by suggesting he 'sought to use legal proceedings to obtain money based on his false claims about the collision'. He alleges the statement implies he has 'sought to rely on a specious report from Dr Shuey to gain a financial advantage to which he is not entitled'.
Allegations of Reputational Harm
Mr Meuleman states he 'did not have a reputation for being dishonest and/or grifting and/or abusing the Court’s processes'. It was also claimed that he has a 'lesser media profile' and is 'less articulate and more vulnerable' than the Andrews. He highlighted that Dr Shuey died after conducting the review and claimed he cannot 'properly defend himself' from 'such a brutal and defamatory attack'.
'The seriousness of the pleaded imputations, which strike at the heart of Mr Meuleman’s reputation for honesty and integrity... have an inherent tendency to cause serious harm to a person’s reputation,' the statement of claim reads. 'The derisory, emotive, punchy and dismissive language used in the joint media statement, which included gratuitous slights against Mr Meuleman and his lawyers... were clearly designed to [undermine] the credibility of Mr Meuleman...'
Credibility was reinforced by the publication of the statement by a variety of eleven mainstream media organisations, 'making it more likely readers would believe the imputations to be true'. Mr Meuleman also claimed in court documents he had been trolled on social media with 'defamatory labels' including the term 'grifter'. He alleged the 'we did nothing wrong' line was 'not only manifestly false and known to be so by Mr and Mrs Andrews' but also 'apt to cause unnecessary hurt and distress'.
Failed Settlement and Ongoing Proceedings
It is also alleged the Andrews' statement was selectively 'provided to journalists or media organisations that were expected or perceived to report it favourably, rather than to all media outlets, as a standalone statement'. Mr Meuleman, via a statement of claim sent through his lawyers, initially offered the Andrews a proposal that they pay $50,000 in compensation and issue an apology.
The proposed apology, detailed in court documents, would have read: 'We sincerely apologise to Ryan Meuleman for hurt, harm and humiliation caused by our comments in our earlier joint public statement. Our comments were unjustifiable and we unreservedly retract them. Ryan has at all times had good and honest reasons for believing that he was not at fault in the collision between our car and his bicycle on 7 January 2013. We apologise for any suggestion that Ryan has lied or acted dishonestly in relation to the collision on 7 January 2013 or that he has done so to obtain some unjustified benefit for himself.'
The Andrews refused this offer and denied they defamed Mr Meuleman, alleging he did not suffer serious harm to his reputation. It remains unclear why the Andrews did not lodge their formal defence before the December 19 deadline or if this will delay the defamation proceeding.
Investigation Findings and Police Response
Among several findings in Dr Shuey's report, he claimed the 'propagation of a lie' started when police recorded the driver's name. A Traffic Incident System report made by police hours after the crash recorded the driver's name as 'Catherine Louie Kesik' - Mrs Andrews' maiden name. The report asserted this 'irregularity' would be a 'standout' for supervisors, insurance, and legal reviewers.
The Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) cleared police of any wrongdoing in December 2017, and Victoria Police defended the conduct of its officers. A police spokesperson stated: 'Victoria Police conducted a thorough investigation into this matter, as did IBAC, and all findings were consistent.'
Future Developments
The Meuleman family last month said their investigation team will present new evidence to the Chief Commissioner of Police. 'Out of respect and deference to the Federal Court, Ryan and his family will not be publicly commenting on these new defamation proceedings,' a representative said. 'Separately, Ryan continues to advocate for a full criminal investigation into the accident. His investigation team has been gathering new evidence which they will present to the Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police in the coming weeks.'
Lawyers for both Mr Meuleman and the Andrews were contacted for comment as the legal battle continues to unfold in the Federal Court.
