Anti-Trans Activist Kirralie Smith Loses AVO Appeal Against Transgender Soccer Player

The New South Wales Court of Appeal has upheld a two-year Apprehended Personal Violence Order (APVO) protecting Stephanie Blanch, a transgender woman and regional soccer player, from anti-trans activist Kirralie Smith.

The ruling, delivered on August 15, 2025, also leaves in place a protective costs order ensuring Blanch will not face any liability for Smith’s legal costs.

Kirralee Smith loses APVO appeal

The case arose after Smith, who leads the anti-trans organisation Binary Australia and has a following of more than 100,000 people online, used social media to target Blanch over her participation in women’s soccer.

Judge Wass SC in the NSW District Court last year described Smith’s conduct as a “sustained campaign of belittling, harassment and intimidation.”

This included a tweet to nearly 40,000 followers calling for “men from the Mid North Coast” to assist with “the bloke playing on the women’s team in Wingham.”

Smith claimed the comment was political commentary, but Judge Wass SC called it “highly intimidatory,” “objectively harassing,” and “unnecessarily cruel.”

He also condemned Smith’s reference to Blanch as a “bloke in a frock,” describing it as “a personal, derogatory, humiliating and degrading statement.”

The apprehended violence order taken out against Smith, ordered her not to assault, threaten, stalk, harass, intimidate, approach, or contact the woman until December 2026 and also directed that she must also not approach two mid-north coast football clubs until then.

Smith’s appeal against the APVO relied on arguments about freedom of speech and political communication, but both the District Court and the Court of Appeal found these unpersuasive. Judge Wass SC ruled that “just because a statement or conduct can be characterised as political, does not preclude it from being intimidation or harassment.” The Court of Appeal agreed, stating, “We would reach the same conclusion with respect to the primary judge’s finding that the conduct in making the posts involved ‘ongoing behaviours which were objectively threatening.’”

Inner City Legal Centre (ICLC) Principal Solicitor Karen Beashel welcomed the outcome, saying, “All residents of NSW have a right to live their lives without being targeted, harassed or intimidated. The decision confirms online harassment (even if dressed as ‘political commentary’) can and will justify the making of an APVO.”

The judgment also addressed the mental harm caused by such behaviour, questioning, “If insults must be tolerated, but assaults need not be, what of intimidatory conduct of the relevant kind?” and recognising “the damaging mental effects (that such conduct) can have on individuals. …conduct of the kind at issue here can also have a deleterious impact on individuals.”

ICLC Criminal Solicitor Bridget O’Kane said, “Free speech does not give you a licence to bully; the law will protect people from ongoing online abuse. Replace the word ‘respondent’ with ‘student’ in the judgement and we have the daily reality for too many school kids. The courts make it clear: online harassment can and must be treated as real harm.”

Judge Wass SC emphasised that a lack of physical contact does not diminish the seriousness of harassment, stating that the relevant legislation “contemplates ‘cyberbullying’ and therefore a species of ‘non-physical’ molestation, allowing unwanted ‘pestering’ or ‘annoyance’ to be made directly to a complainant via digital means.”

In June, before the appeal was heard, Justice Adamson SC granted a protective costs order ensuring Blanch would not face any financial liability for Smith’s legal costs if she lost.

Following the decision Kirralie Smith took to social media refusing to back down on her claims.

“I lost the appeal and I am still under a 2 year apprehension of violence order for identifying a male in a female soccer team. I have never named him, met him or asked others to target him” she wrote. 

“But I guess if they can redefine the word “woman” why wouldn’t they redefine the word “violence”? This is simply an attempt to stop my advocacy. I won’t stop. Men can not be women. Men do not belong in women’s sport. Only men get upset and take women like me and @salltweets to court for saying no to them.

I lost the appeal and I am still under a 2 year apprehension of violence order for identifying a male in a female soccer team.

I have never named him, met him or asked others to target him.

But I guess if they can redefine the word “woman” why wouldn’t they redefine the word… pic.twitter.com/J9wA8dpg2w

— Kirralie Smith (@KirralieS) August 15, 2025

Controversial owner of women’s dating app Sall Grover, who was also in court this month for her own appeal in the Giggle V Tickle case also took to social media to voice her support for Smith.

“Kirralie Smith has lost her appeal challenging an AVO brought against her by a male member of the “transgender community” who was playing in a women’s sports team.  @KirralieS posted publicly available photos & called out the male in the women’s team. The male said he felt unsafe” she wrote.

Kirralie Smith has lost her appeal challenging an AVO brought against her by a male member of the “transgender community” who was playing in a women’s sports team. @KirralieS posted publicly available photos & called out the male in the women’s team. The male said he felt unsafe. pic.twitter.com/ZQ1wVKnB4O

— Sall Grover (@salltweets) August 15, 2025