Victorian Liberals slapped with legal letter from spurned candidate

Dumped parliamentary hopeful Grant Hutchinson has sent a legal letter to the Victorian Liberal Party challenging his termination as the party’s candidate for Croydon, raising the prospect of another damaging court case six weeks out from the election.

In a letter to the Victorian Liberals state director, seen by The Age, RV Lawyers say they represent Hutchinson and were lodging a formal challenge to his removal.

They allege the party’s state executive breached their constitution at a meeting on October 12 where they cancelled Hutchinson’s endorsement and immediately selected a new candidate for Croydon, Toby Wooldridge, son of former federal health minister Michael Wooldridge.

At the time, Liberal chiefs refused to publicly explain the move to dump its candidate so close to the November 28 poll, saying only that new information had come to light.

But party figures told The Age there had been growing frustration with Hutchinson’s candidacy and concern over an ongoing legal dispute with the former partners of his law firm.

Three Liberal sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential deliberations, said the state executive had realised the party could be dragged into the court case.

One source said a discovery obligation was believed to require Hutchinson to share Liberal Party correspondence with his former legal partners, which risked having sensitive party material made public.

Hutchinson had previously messaged local branch members raising concerns over the decision to dump him, but escalated the dispute with the legal letter on Wednesday.

He paired it with his own lengthy letter to members of the state executive expressing concerns in his own words.

“The future of the Victorian Liberal Party is, in no small part, in your hands,” Hutchinson said.

“Have we become a party in which the State Executive acts as judge, jury and executioner, without affording those affected a proper opportunity to be heard?”

The letter from RV Lawyers does not mean a formal court proceeding has been lodged, but it raises the prospect of further action if Hutchinson continues to challenge the decision.

Another legal battle within the party would also be damaging for the Victorian Liberals, which have been dogged by court cases over the past four years including Moira Deeming’s successful defamation case against then-opposition leader John Pesutto.

Hutchinson’s arguments against his removal have largely rested on whether he was given a fair opportunity to respond to claims and whether he should have been able to speak to the party leadership before his removal.

But two Liberal sources unauthorised to speak publicly say he will also argue that state executive wasn’t given enough warning about the vote on his removal, and that it wasn’t fully disclosed in their meeting agenda until discussions were already under way.

In his letter to the state executive, Hutchinson said he had provided details of his legal case to the party as they had become available and that he had won preselection even after details of the case had been raised with party delegates.

Hutchinson said he had continued to provide information to the state director about the case, including a meeting the Thursday before the AFL grand final where he had detailed a second potential case he had initiated that he proposed to merge with the first case.

“Had I been afforded the basic courtesy of addressing the State Executive before you determined my political future, many of the matters apparently relied upon, including matters previously clarified, addressed or withdrawn, could have been resolved,” he said.

“Instead, I believe the Executive was presented with incorrect, incomplete and inaccurate information, resulting in the extraordinary decision to cancel my endorsement, not because an adverse issue had actually emerged publicly, but because someone speculated that one might emerge.

“I remain confident that any such issue, had it arisen, could have been promptly and appropriately managed and potentially turned to our electoral advantage. I would welcome the opportunity to explain why.”

Hutchinson also said he had been told from “various sources” that his relationship with his campaign liaison officer was also a factor in his removal.

“Again, how unfortunate that no opportunity was afforded to me to present the actual position,” he said.

“On at least two occasions, I attempted to recalibrate and rebuild that working relationship. Those efforts were unsuccessful, leaving me increasingly concerned that my campaign liaison office and the state director lacked the needed commitment to the Croydon campaign.”

Hutchinson said his removal and other party decisions him left the impression that conservative candidates, such as himself, were being shut out of preselections.

“Whatever individual explanations may be offered for these decisions, the cumulative effect sends a deeply troubling message: conservative members may be welcome to volunteer, campaign, donate and support the party, but are they still welcome to represent it?”

On Thursday, Opposition Leader Jess Wilson would not be drawn on Hutchinson’s claims.

“That’s a matter for the Liberal Party,” she said.

The Liberal Party declined to comment.

Read more on the Victorian election: