When AVOs Collide with Social Media: Navigating Privacy, Harassment & Defamation Risks in NSW

In our digital era, conflicts often play out on social media platforms— where a single comment, tag, or post can carry serious legal implications, especially under an Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) in New South Wales. While social media may feel informal, courts have increasingly treated online interactions as legally significant and actionable.

At LY Lawyers, we’re well-versed in guiding clients through this evolving intersection of AVOs, privacy concerns, and defamation law. 

AVO Conditions & Online Behaviour: What NSW Law Says

Under Section 14 of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), intentionally breaching an AVO is a criminal offence punishable by up to 2 years in prison or 50 penalty units. Importantly, the law extends to indirect contact, meaning social media activities—including tags, comments, shares, or negative posts—may qualify, even if unintended or indirect.

Another relevant provision is Section 13, covering stalking or intimidation with intent to cause fear, which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years’ imprisonment or 50 penalty units. Public-facing social media posts that alarm or threaten could fall under this category.

How Courts Treat “Likes” and Other Social Media Interactions

You might assume that a casual “like” is harmless—but NSW case law suggests otherwise. In Bolton v Stoltenberg [2018] NSWSC 1518, the Supreme Court ruled that simply “liking” a defamatory post may be sufficient for liability if it amplifies the harmful content to others. While that was a defamation context, the same logic could translate to AVO breaches via amplification.

AVO Meets Defamation: Real-World Examples from NSW

Constructing the overlap of AVOs and defamation, the case Cosco v Hutley (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 893 is instructive. AHO disputes between neighbours led to AVOs and a defamation lawsuit broadcast via Channel Nine’s “A Current Affair.” The Supreme Court found the defamatory statements—and hostile conduct—were severe enough to award damages exceeding $360,000.

Separately, NSW courts have been active in social media defamation cases. For example:

• In Mickle v Farley [2013] NSWDC 295, a teacher was awarded $105,000 after false accusations were posted online. 
• Gan v Zadravic [2021] NSWDC 533 involved a Facebook post suggesting unpaid superannuation; the court found it capable of defamatory meaning. 
• Bolton v Stoltenberg also resulted in a combined $110,000 in damages for defamatory Facebook posts.

The Evolving Legal Landscape: Defamation & Publication in the Digital Age

A landmark High Court case—Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Voller—ruled that media companies become publishers not only of their own posts but also of any third-party comments on their public Facebook pages. This principle underscores how platform design choices itself can create liability—an important lesson for social media actors under AVO scrutiny.

This verdict reflects broader efforts to modernize defamation laws for the digital sphere. NSW and the ACT have enacted reforms to address online defamation more clearly, yet federal harmonisation remains incomplete.

Common Defences for Social Media-Linked AVO Breaches

Anyone accused of breaching an AVO with online behaviour should know these key defences may apply:

• Unintentional breach: Automated tags, reposts, or account takeovers may lack deliberate intent.
• Ambiguity in the AVO wording: If the order doesn’t explicitly cover online actions, it may be challenged.
• Lack of intent to intimidate: Posts may constitute expression or opinion rather than harassment or intimidation.
• Digital evidence context matters: Was the post private or public? A mistake or misfire may be treated more leniently.

Given how nuanced these issues can be, specialist legal guidance is essential.

Staying Safe Online While Subject to an AVO

If you’re under an AVO in NSW, consider these practical protections:

• Never post about the protected person—even indirectly.
• Avoid references that might be construed as harassment, even through mutual friends.
• Unfollow, mute or block the protected person (or related accounts) to minimize accidental contact.
• When in doubt, consult a lawyer before posting.

And for professional advice, reach out to LY Lawyers for better guidance and solution. 

FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions)

Q: Can I “like” a post about the protected person?
Possibly—courts have held that liking defamatory content may count as aiding its spread and could amount to an AVO breach or defamation liability.

Q: Do AVOs explicitly mention social media?
Not usually—but NSW law covers indirect contact. Courts may interpret any public online engagement (tags, posts, comments) as potential breaches.

Q: Can I face defamation charges and AVO penalties for the same post?
Yes. A single social media action could result in criminal penalties under AVO laws and civil defamation claims—both of which must be addressed strategically.

Digital communication has blurred the lines between harmless interaction and serious legal risk—particularly under AVO restrictions. In NSW, the law increasingly deems social media activity capable of constituting harassment, intimidation, or defamation—and penalties can be severe.

With expertise over 50 years of combined experience, LY Lawyers Sydney can guide you through the law, assess your case, and build the best defence:

• Available 24/7 for urgent criminal law advice
• Offices in Sydney CBD, Parramatta, Liverpool, and beyond
• Proven record of defending charges from offensive conduct to assault

Contact LY Lawyers today for confidential consultation!