Former Victorian premier Daniel Andrews and his wife Catherine have officially denied defaming the teenage boy seriously injured in a bicycle crash with their car 13 years ago.
The couple broke their silence when they finally lodged their defence with the Federal Court of Australia after Ryan Meuleman sued the pair in December last year.
Meuleman alleged online trolls labelled him a ‘grifter’ after the couple’s media statement in September 2024 said a review into the collision was the result of ‘appalling conspiracy theories’.
However, the couple claim they haven’t defamed Meuleman while also contending that, even if the joint statement caused serious harm to Mr Meuleman’s reputation, they were themselves subjected to a media witch hunt, which could mitigate any alleged damages.
The Andrews alleged in their defence that at ‘relevant times since at least 2022’ Meuleman ‘sought to court public and media attention and publicity in relation to the collision’.
The Andrews also alleged Meuleman sought to ‘inflict reputational damage on the respondents in relation to the collision’ and ‘advance the personal or political agendas of members of the Meuleman Cohort’, in court documents seen by the Daily Mail.
‘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 Andrews’ defence states.
It’s also alleged by the couple that 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’.
Former Victorian premier Daniel Andrews and his wife Catherine have denied they defamed ‘Bike Boy’ Ryan Meuleman
Meuleman suffered serious injuries after the collision
Andrews was Victorian opposition leader when the Ford Territory SUV carrying him, his wife, and their three children collided with Ryan, then 15, while he was cycling in the seaside town of Blairgowrie on January 7, 2013.
Andrews told police his wife Catherine was driving and had come to a ‘complete stop’ before she ‘turned right from a stationary position’ when the teen 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 seen by the Daily Mail, Mr Meuleman ‘continues to suffer pain from the injuries he sustained as a result of the collision’.
He also ‘continues to suffer from significant symptoms of depression, anxiety and traumatisation’, the document states.
The documents claim the Andrews ‘impliedly admitted’ via their lawyers that their press release comments ‘Joint Statement’ were in response to a media article which highlighted a review of the collision by Raymond Shuey, the former Assistant Commissioner for Traffic Operations.
Dr Shuey reviewed the collision and made 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.
‘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,’ the Andrews’ statement read.
Andrews told police his wife Catherine was driving and had come to a ‘complete stop’
The couple’s SUV (above) sustained major damage
The Andrews are fighting the allegations
‘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 Slater and Gordon dispute was settled for an undisclosed amount, claimed the Andrews accused him of ‘lying about the facts and circumstances of the collision’.
Mr Meuleman also alleged he was defamed because he ‘sought to use legal proceedings to obtain money based on his false claims about the collision’.
He alleges the Andrews’ statement suggests he has ‘sought to rely on a specious report from Dr Shuey to gain a financial advantage to which he is not entitled’.
Mr Meuleman also 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 Mr Meuleman has a ‘lesser media profile’ and is ‘less articulate and more vulnerable’ than the Andrews.
Mr Meuleman also highlighted Dr Shuey died after conducting the review and claimed he cannot ‘properly defend himself’ from ‘such a brutal and defamatory attack’.
Mr Meuleman claimed the Andrews accused him of ‘lying about the facts and circumstances of the collision’
‘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’.
Mr Meuleman also 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’.
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 via his lawyers, initially offered the Andrews a proposal that they pay $50,000 in compensation and issue an apology.
The statement of claim, in court documents seen by the Daily Mail, reveals it 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,’ the proposed apology says in the statement of claim.
‘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 the offer and denied they defamed Mr Meuleman, who they alleged did not suffer serious harm to his reputation.
It’s not known why Andrews did not lodge their formal defence with the court before the December 19 deadline or if this will delay the defamation proceeding.
Among several findings in the report, Dr Shuey 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.
Andrews maintains his wife was driving the SUV
It asserted that the ‘irregularity’ with Mrs Andrews’ name 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.
‘Victoria Police conducted a thorough investigation into this matter, as did IBAC, and all findings were consistent,’ a police spokesperson said.
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 Mr Meuleman and the Andrews were contacted for comment.
