Businessman Aidan Murphy says he has had ‘the worst year’ after he faced off against Married At First Sight star Lauren Dunn in court.
Murphy, 38, filed a defamation lawsuit against Dunn, 34, in August last year over several social media posts she made suggesting he ‘was a supporter of domestic violence’.
The Daily Mail can now reveal Dunn was hit with an 18-month restraining order, and was ordered to pay costs to Murphy to the tune of $13,300.
‘It gives my family and me some breathing room after an extremely difficult period,’ Murphy said.
‘I want peace for my family and the opportunity for us to move forward with our lives.
‘I am not going to speculate about what might happen when the order expires.’
Businessman Aidan Murphy says he has had ‘the worst year’ after he faced off against Married At First Sight star Lauren Dunn (pictured) in court
‘If it is breached, or if the conduct resumes in the future, I will take legal advice and deal with it through the proper process,’ he said.
The Daily Mail does not suggest that Dunn intends to breach any order or defame Murphy further.
Murphy said the thousands Dunn will be paying him in costs ‘does not come close to covering the overall legal expenses or the impact this has had on my family and me’.
‘But I did not take these steps looking for a payout,’ he added.
‘This was about stopping the conduct, protecting my family from further untrue allegations and giving my children the chance to get on with their lives without this continually being brought back into the public domain.
‘They should never have been left carrying the consequences of something that had absolutely nothing to do with their father.’
Murphy filed the defamation lawsuit against Dunn last August, claiming she had posted malicious and false comments about him online between July 14 and July 21.
The summons was filed with the court on August 15.
Join the discussion
Should social media users face tougher consequences for making damaging public accusations?
Murphy (pictured) filed a defamation lawsuit against Dunn in August 2025 over several social media posts she made suggesting he ‘was a supporter of domestic violence’
In it, the managing director claimed Dunn defamed him and, by extension, the business he works for, United Resourcing.
Murphy did not specify in the summons which posts allegedly defamed him; however, it is understood they have since been removed from social media.
Murphy’s lawyer, Roger Blow, filed the summons and requested that the court issue an injunction to stop Dunn from making similar posts.
Murphy alleged that Dunn made the posts out of ‘malice’, and Blow claimed the reality TV star was also liable for defamatory remarks made by her followers.
At the time, Dunn claimed her posts were a reaction to remarks Murphy allegedly made about her in relation to her ex-boyfriend, former AFL player Ryan Crowley.
Crowley, 42, is fighting accusations of domestic violence against Dunn in court after WA Police charged him with 13 offences, to which he has since pleaded not guilty and will face trial this year.
Dunn is also seeking an apprehended violence order against Crowley through the NSW courts, which will be heard on August 10.
Murphy says Dunn accused him of being a ‘supporter of domestic violence against women’, and ‘linked that accusation’ to his former working relationship with Crowley.
Dunn was hit with an 18-month restraining order, and was ordered to pay costs to Murphy to the tune of $13,300
‘My case is that the clear and direct meaning of Lauren’s posts was that I was a supporter of domestic violence against women,’ Murphy said.
‘I completely deny that allegation and say it is false. It couldn’t be further from the truth and anyone that knows me, including my former partner, would attest to that.’
Murphy says his defamation lawsuit against Dunn was in relation to seven posts published in July 2025, but claims ‘there were also further posts and indirect references after that, including as recently as around a week before the restraining order was made, which I understood from their context to be directed at me.’
‘Because some of those later posts did not name me, I do not want to exaggerate or give an artificial total,’ he added.
‘What I can say is that each time the subject was raised publicly again, it brought those allegations and their consequences back into my family’s life.
‘My children should never have had to live with the possibility of seeing or hearing their father described as someone who supports violence against women.
‘They did nothing to deserve that. As their father, I had a responsibility to protect them and challenge the allegations through the proper legal process.’
Dunn has previously claimed her posts were a reaction to negative remarks Murphy allegedly made about her in relation to her ex-boyfriend, former AFL player Ryan Crowley (left)
Murphy says he and Dunn did not know each other on a personal level, saying they met very briefly only once ‘two or three years ago’.
‘I met her once, very briefly, at Ryan’s apartment after attending an AFL match with my father and son. As we were leaving, I saw Lauren in the entryway,’ he said.
‘I introduced myself politely and asked her name. That was the entire interaction and the only contact I had with her before the first social media posts appeared in July 2025.
‘Lauren and I were never friends, had no ongoing relationship and had never had any personal dispute.’
Murphy went on to say he believed the court ‘took seriously the gravity’ of what Dunn had been alleging about Murphy online.
‘I do not want to put words in the magistrate’s mouth or claim that he made findings beyond what is recorded by the court,’ he said.
‘However, from the breadth and detail of the orders put in place, I believe it is clear that the court took seriously the gravity of what was occurring, its ongoing nature and the nature of the attacks directed at me.’
Murphy said the outcome ‘demonstrates that the matter was treated seriously. Most importantly, the orders put protections in place so that my family and I can have some peace.’
The Daily Mail understands the orders were made in Dunn’s absence.
This wasn’t the only run-in Murphy had with the courts in 2025. He told the Mail he had ‘the worst year’ after he was misidentified by police and arrested on false charges.
Murphy says he and Dunn (pictured during filming of MAFS) did not know each other on a personal level, saying they met very briefly only once ‘two or three years ago’
In September 2025, one month after he lodged the defamation lawsuit against Dunn, Murphy was arrested and falsely charged with possession of cocaine and breaching a family violence restraining order.
The charges were later dismissed in February 2026 and Murphy claims that police were then ordered to pay him $10,000 in damages.
However, when the Mail looked into the case, we discovered the damages were for $6,000. Murphy subsequently acknowledged his error.
‘The police made a serious mistake by involving me in a matter that had nothing to do with me,’ he said.
‘Another person admitted responsibility for the conduct that police had attributed to me.
‘Once that became clear, all charges against me were abandoned and no convictions were recorded.
‘I was later paid $10,000 [$6,000] in compensation arising from the errors that had been made and the way I had been wrongly involved in the matter.
‘Again, my family were left dealing with the stress, embarrassment and consequences of something that had nothing to do with me.
‘That is why it is so important to me that the accurate position is put on the public record and that my family is protected from further untrue allegations.’
The Daily Mail understands that Dunn intends to appeal the costs order.
Read the full article here
