Liv Nervo speaks out against the man who tricked her into pregnancy

After a legal battle dragged out over four years, and which is still not over, the Australian DJ Liv Nervo can finally talk of how the prominent business man who tricked her into a pregnancy has used the courts to continue his abuse. Liv wanted to publicly challenge issues around consent, reproductive coercion and how family courts handle claims of abuse by powerful people – but she was silenced, gagged by a court order that prevented her from telling the full truth about her abuser’s conduct. 

Too often has Good Law Project seen wealthy men misusing the law to gag the women they abused. Because the law is a tool only the wealthy can use, and because it’s men who tend to have the money, the law is a weapon enlisted in service of the patriarchy.

But, thanks to a bizarre decision by the father to appeal a decision made by the High Court in London to award her costs, she can now tell the full story.

In 2016, Liv met businessman Matthew Pringle – New Zealand’s “Honey King” – from Auckland who owns Manuka Dr, Honey New Zealand, and several other companies rumoured to be worth hundreds of millions, with products sold globally in retailers like Holland & Barrett. Crucially, he comes from one of New Zealand’s wealthiest families.

For over two years, Liv thought they were in a committed, monogamous relationship. They spoke frequently about marriage and starting a family. Matthew travelled across the world to see her on her ‘fertile’ days so they could conceive. But while she was pregnant with his child, Liv discovered the devastating truth: Pringle had been in a long-term relationship with another woman for all the time they were together. He had hidden the fact that he already had a child, and that she was also pregnant with a second child at the same time as Liv.

And it didn’t end there. Liv also found out that Pringle had also been leading a secret third life with a third woman.

Liv felt her reproductive autonomy had been completely violated – she had been tricked into believing she was building a future and a family with someone who was available to be a father to their child, and whom she trusted. But he had deceived her on every level. 

“I’m doing this because I don’t want any other woman to go through what I did,” Liv says, “tricked, silenced, and dragged through years of expensive court battles by someone who abused their power. 

“Reproductive coercion is a form of violence, and it’s time our laws reflected that. This isn’t just about justice for me – it’s about creating lasting change for the next generation.”

Pringle did not meet the daughter he conceived with Liv until just before her fourth birthday. Despite his years of absence, and after threatening claims of defamation, Pringle brought proceedings against Liv in England’s family court in 2022, seeking greater control over his child’s life. And, because she would need to facilitate the contact he sought, over her life too. Defending herself and her daughter has cost Liv more than half a million pounds.

Liv feels Pringle is using the courts to carry on abusing her even though they’ve separated, weaponising their child to exert ongoing control over her. He has made claims and then withdrawn them at the last minute, forcing her to spend significant time, energy, and money, only to be left in limbo.

“Right now, our legal system allows abusers to exploit technicalities, hide behind transparency and privacy orders, and use litigation as a tool of control,” Liv says. 

“That has to change. We need legislation that protects victims of reproductive and sexual coercion and holds perpetrators accountable – not shields them.”

But Liv is no longer silent. With Good Law Project’s help, she’s fighting back – for herself, and for the many other women whose voices have been suppressed by legal systems designed to shield the powerful.

Liv says she’s speaking out because “no one should have to fight this hard to protect their child or to tell the truth”:

“It’s time the system stopped shielding abusers and started standing with survivors.”

• When we published this article, Pringle’s lawyers asked us to remove some details about the case. After legal correspondence, we reinstated them on 18 February.