Liv Nervo: Court calls Pringle’s ‘shameful’ conduct ‘abuse’

After facing years of litigation, Liv Nervo can finally tell her story, after the Court of Appeal ruled that Matthew Pringle’s “shameful and deceitful” behaviour when he tricked Liv into pregnancy was “domestic abuse”.

The judgment reveals how a relationship that started in 2016 was built on deceit. Three years later, when Liv was pregnant and went to visit the wealthy businessman unannounced, she discovered Pringle was in a long-term relationship with another woman. He already had a child with this other woman, who was pregnant with a second child at the time. And he was even seeing a third woman.

Pringle threatened Liv with legal action for libel, and took her to court in 2022 in an attempt to gain control over the child’s life – even though he did not meet their child until she was almost four.

During these expensive proceedings, Pringle admitted he had led Liv to believe she was in “a committed, monogamous relationship”, that Liv’s pregnancy was “planned” and that he had caused her “emotional harm”. The court ruled that his behaviour was “reprehensible” and came under the “heading of domestic abuse”.

But the court also put a “transparency order” in place – an order which stopped Liv from telling her story and kept Pringle’s conduct in the dark.

Pringle may have admitted his shameful behaviour, but he didn’t have to face the consequences.

We helped Liv to break this wall of silence, publishing her story and naming Pringle as the man who had deceived her. So he threatened us – claiming we had libelled him and that we were in breach of a court order.

Now the Court of Appeal has pulled back the curtain, setting out how Pringle conned Liv into bearing his child and branding his “shameful and deceitful” behaviour “domestic abuse”.

The court also hit out at the upside-down logic of transparency orders, which allow powerful men to hide behind expensive legal action, doing “precisely the opposite of what it says on the tin”.

For Katrina McDonnell, campaigns manager at Good Law Project, this case shows how powerful men can weaponise the legal system against women.

“This kind of legal gaslighting turns laws meant to protect women into shields for those who harm them,” McDonnell said, “leaving victims isolated and their voices ignored. We need the courts to protect women, not protect men from scrutiny.”

That’s why we’re taking action. Women’s safety and justice aren’t optional, and we won’t let secrecy or loopholes get in the way.