Plain language law

New Zealand law explained for everyone

This page is about a bill. That means that it's not the law yet, but some people want it to be the law. It could change quickly, and some of the information is just a draft.

Social Media (Age-Restricted Users) Bill

Provider duties - Enforcement

11: Considerations for court

You could also call this:

"What the court thinks about when a social media provider does something wrong"

Illustration for Social Media (Age-Restricted Users) Bill

If you are in court because of something a social media provider did, the court will think about some things. The court will consider how much the provider's actions go against what this proposed law is trying to achieve. The court will also think about whether the provider tried to fix their mistake. The court will look at whether the provider's actions were on purpose or very careless. You will want to know that the court will think about what happened and if the provider has done something like this before. The court will consider if the provider's actions hurt someone who was not supposed to be using their social media platform.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

This page was last updated on

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=LMS1536463.

Previous

10: Maximum amount of pecuniary penalty, or

"The maximum fine for breaking social media rules is $2,000,000"

Next

12: Defence for failure to prevent age-restricted user from accessing age-restricted social media platforms, or

"It's not the provider's fault if they tried to stop someone too young from using their site but were given wrong information."

Part 2Provider duties
Enforcement

11Considerations for court

  1. In determining whether to make an order, and the amount of any pecuniary penalty to be paid, the court must have regard to the following matters:

  2. the extent to which the provider’s conduct undermines the purposes of this Act:
    1. any harm caused to an age-restricted user as a result of the provider’s failure to prevent them from accessing their age-restricted social media platform:
      1. whether the provider has taken steps to mitigate their failure:
        1. whether the provider’s conduct was intentional or reckless:
          1. the circumstances of the provider’s conduct:
            1. whether the provider has previously engaged in similar conduct:
              1. any other matters the court considered relevant.