The opposition believes Mr Gillespie’s private business dealings have breached Section 44 of the Constitution, which says federal politicians are not allowed to have a direct or indirect financial interest in the Commonwealth.
David Gillespie, a Nationals MP, owns a small shopping centre in Port Macquarie that houses an Australia Post, which is a government-owned corporation.
If a court challenge to disqualify Mr Gillespie from office, it would trigger a by-election in the seat of Lyne, which could threaten the Turnbull Government's one-seat majority in the lower house.
Deputy Labor Leader Tanya Plibersek confirmed Peter Alley, who was Labor’s candidate in Mr Gillespie’s seat at the last election, had commenced proceedings in the High Court.
“We are not sure whether Dr Gillespie is actually, constitutionally, able to sit in the House of Representatives,” Ms Plibersek said on Friday.
“Dr Gillespie has a conflict of interest. That's a matter of public record.”
The Labor challenge will argue for Mr Gillespie’s disqualification under similar grounds to those that saw former Family First senator Bob Day ruled invalidly elected earlier this year.
Ms Pibersek accused the government of turning a blind eye to Mr Gillespie’s eligibility because he was “one of their own” and the Turnbull Government was “relying on this one vote”.
Mr Gillespie’s office told SBS World News the MP would not be commenting at this stage.
'Labor stunt'
Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has rubbished the legal challenge, calling it a “Labor stunt”
“It sounds like another attempt by Labor to disrupt and distract from the Government's policies,” Ms Bishop said.
“We'll wait to see what detail Labor intend to come up with.”
Dr Gillespie has reportedly received independent legal advice that there is no constitutional issue with him sitting in parliament, which the government is satisfied with.
Anne Twomey, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Sydney, told Sky News the chances of a successful challenge were “reasonably remote”.
She said the key consideration for the court was how distant the “financial interest” was, and whether the agreement was one “ordinarily made between a government and a citizen”.
She explained that every politician who bought a coffee from the Parliament House cafe would be in breach of the rule if the court did not allow for the normal civilian lives of politicians.
“More likely than not, it’s on the side of being reasonably safe [for Mr Gillespie],” Dr Twomey said.
The Nationals would likely win Dr Gillespie's seat again if a by-election were called.
-with AAP
Share
