Melbourne barrister allegedly signed petition to ‘impeach’ Matthew Guy

Prominent Melbourne barrister Robert Richter claims he has “no recollection” of signing a petition by wannabe MP David Vincent to boot Matthew Guy from parliament.

A well-known Melbourne barrister has become entangled in an audacious bid by an independent candidate to “impeach” former opposition leader Matthew Guy and oust him from parliament.

David Vincent, who lost to Mr Guy at the state election, filed a petition with the Supreme Court in December declaring the Liberal MP was “not a fit and proper person to sit in parliament”.

Mr Vincent had asked the court to make him the member for Bulleen instead – despite only snagging 214 votes compared to Mr Guy’s 20,645.

The petition was on Tuesday thrown out by Justice John Dixon, who detailed in his judgment how top Melbourne silk Robert Richter, KC, was alleged to have signed Mr Vincent’s petition.

David Vincent filed a petition with the Supreme Court, declaring former opposition leader Matthew Guy was “not a fit and proper person to sit in parliament”.

The wannabe MP gave evidence at a hearing last month, stating he attended Mr Richter’s chambers after “wandering around” and checking out a number of other chambers.

“He knew of Mr Richter, a Melbourne barrister, by reputation,” Judge Dixon said.

“He approached Mr Richter’s secretary, Ms Bradley, who he says agreed to act as a witness. “He explained that he needed a second witness as Mr Richter walked by and that he agreed to sign the document.”

Mr Vincent said he told the silk his petition was to “stop corruption in Victoria” and claimed Mr Richter replied something along the lines of: “It would be good if we had less corruption.”

But barrister Rohan Ajzensztat, representing Mr Guy, said he made inquiries with Mr Richter, who told him the signature appeared to be his but he was unaware how it came to be affixed to the petition.

According to Mr Ajzensztat, Mr Richter had “no recollection” of the petition or of witnessing any documents for the Court of Disputed Returns, in which Mr Vincent’s petition was heard.

Top criminal barrister Robert Richter, KC, allegedly signed the petition. Picture: Zak Simmonds

Mr Richter told Mr Ajzensztat he did not believe he would have witnessed such a document, but he recalled having signed a handwritten document that was not the petition.

Justice Dixon said Mr Richter could have thought he was signing a “general petition for action against corruption directed to an unidentified recipient” instead of an electoral act petition.

But he said it was ultimately “unnecessary to form a concluded view” as to whether Mr Vincent’s petition was validly witnessed.

The petition pointed to a string of controversies that have plagued Mr Guy’s career, including his decision to rezone farmland on Phillip Island while Planning Minister and his infamous Lobster with a Mobster scandal.

He also raised recent allegations, which have been referred to IBAC, involving Mr Guy’s former chief of staff Mitch Catlin who allegedly asked a party donor to donate more than $100,000 to his private business.

Mr Vincent, who resides in California Gully near Bendigo, also wanted to be appointed the Speaker of the Assembly or President of the Council so he could “clear up the mess” in what he described as a corrupt parliament.

The petition pointed to a string of controversies that have plagued Mr Guy’s career, including the infamous Lobster with a Mobster scandal. Picture: David Caird

But, in his judgment, Judge Dixon said his allegations were “irrelevant, inappropriate and scandalous” and said the petition was an “abuse of process, foredoomed to fail”.

“This court cannot impeach a member of parliament,” he said.

“It cannot appoint Mr Vincent ‘as if Governor’ or to be the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, nor ‘another Victorian with decades of integrity and experience’.

“These purported powers of the court simply do not exist.”

The former ATO public officer, who represented himself, was told by Justice Dixon his petition was an “exercise in vanity”.

But he did not believe the failed independent intended to “abuse court process or needlessly waste public resources”.

“He was not legally assisted, stating that he could not find a lawyer to help him, and that lack of guidance is probably what resulted in his unsustainable petition,” he said.

Mr Vincent was ordered to pay Mr Guy’s legal costs.

The California Gully resident received the lowest first preference vote in Bulleen, winning only 0.5 per cent of the total count, placing him behind other independent hopeful Sanjeev Sabhlok, as well as candidates from the Animal Justice Party and Family First Victoria.

Mr Guy won 48.1 per cent of first preferences, with Labor’s candidate Ian Rogers only managing to pick up 32.7 per cent.