Lawyers for a teenage cyclist who claims he was hit by former Victorian premier Dan Andrews’ car have scoffed at threats of contempt of court over a leaked recording.
Audio of the triple-0 call made by Andrews after the family car collided with a cyclist was released last month and made national headlines.
Andrews was state opposition leader when the van he, his wife and three children were traveling in crashed with teenage cyclist Ryan Meuleman near Blairgowrie, on Victoria’s Mornington Peninsula, on January 7, 2013.
Andrews has always maintained that his wife, Catherine, was driving and came to a complete stop when Meuleman, then 15, crashed into his Ford Territory.
The controversial call captured Mr Andrews telling the operator: “We hit him.”
Meuleman is now suing the law firm Slater & Gordon, which represented him after the accident, for allegedly failing to act in his best interests when negotiating an $80,000 compensation settlement with the Transportation Accident Commission.
Slater & Gordon denies the allegations and on Wednesday made a veiled accusation that Mueleman’s new legal team had leaked the recording to the media, sparking a furious response.
Former Victorian Premier Dan Andrews and his wife Catherine. Mr. Andrews was captured on audio declaring: “We hit him.”
“As officials of the court, we were concerned about bringing to the court’s attention this possible misuse of a potential document that is subject to a Harman Undertaking (a binding obligation),” a Slater & Gordon attorney told the Supreme Court. Victory.
James Catlin, a representative for Mueleman, denied that his company was behind the alleged leak, suggesting that Slater & Gordon file a contempt application or back out.
“What’s really behind this is the suggestion that someone has committed contempt,” he said.
‘So if they want to file a contempt citation, they should file a contempt citation instead of being willing to hurt, but afraid to attack.
“I don’t know if this is an attempt to intimidate just before mediation, but there is no request before you, there is just a vague implication that is presumably an invitation to impose some burden on my client, who is on Centrelink.”
Catlin said the fact that the recording had been revealed by the mainstream media had nothing to do with him, adding that in itself it was an “important matter of public interest.”
“I don’t know why Slater & Gordon and the insurer aren’t investigating those media outlets,” he said.
“My instructor has already indicated that she has not broken any commitments.”
Catlin said coming to court to argue the complaint was increasing the cost burden on his struggling client.
‘I want no further measures to be taken. “If they want to file a contempt citation, they should do so,” he said.
Ryan Meuleman is pictured recovering in the hospital after the accident.
Mr Andrews’ car was damaged after Mr Meuleman came into contact with it.
The court heard that the recording had been distributed to interested parties in the case, including government agencies, for months before it appeared in the news.
“I don’t know if this is a forensic closure of the door that we had in May, but it was made public at the end of October, so we are to blame,” Mr Catlin said.
“I just don’t know what this is, what the defendant is doing here, but we’re having a hard time… I’m not sure what the defendant is asking for when he says, ‘We want to make sure everyone is on the same page moving forward.'”
“That’s just word salad.”
Court Recorder Natalie Burgess agreed with Mr Catlin and effectively asked Slater & Gordon to “put up or shut up”.
“Mr. Catlin is right,” he said. ‘It is not clear to me whether the defendant is moving the court in any particular course. There is an established calendar.
“If your client wishes to submit a particular request, today I will establish a schedule for that request to be submitted.”
Slater & Gordon’s lawyer responded: “In the defendant’s view, that is a matter for the court to consider and he is certainly not pressing for such an application to be made today.”
Burgess refused to consider the matter further and suggested that both sides get on with the job at hand.
‘I have no intention of instructing the parties on their obligations as professionals. I think they understand them,’ he said.
The matter will now move to a mediation hearing in the hope it can be resolved before the trial date in May next year.
Former Premier Dan Andrews locked down Victorians longer than anyone else during the Covid-19 pandemic
The incident involving Mr Andrews has been doing the rounds for more than a decade.
When emergency services arrived at the scene, Ms Andrews was not given a breathalyzer test.
Andrews also told police in a statement less than a month after the accident: “I want to make it clear: the cyclist collided with our vehicle.”
But questions have been raised about the crash preparations and police handling of the situation after a report published in September this year showed the investigation was “deeply flawed”.
Andrews criticized what he called “appalling conspiracy theories” following the review by former deputy police commissioner Dr Raymond Shuey, commissioned by Meuleman’s lawyers.
Ryan’s father, Peter Meuleman, said the report shed “a whole new light on what happened” to his son.
Meuleman said Dr. Shuey’s report “contravenes the police report of what happened and contravenes Daniel and Catherine Andrews’ version of events.”
“We hope that Victoria Police will reopen the case and fully re-investigate it,” he added.
Although Peter said that “a lot of old wounds have mostly healed” in the 13 years since the accident, the family felt at the time that they “didn’t really get justice.”