Married At First Sight stars are considering legal action against Nine

After Channel Seven’s historic payout to a House Rules contestant who was unfairly portrayed as a ‘villain’, the floodgates have opened for other disgruntled reality stars to take legal action against broadcasters.

On Wednesday, Davina Rankin told Hit 105 that she is considering making a claim against Channel Nine and producers Endemol Shine Australia after she was portrayed in a negative light on Married At First Sight last year.

Davina, who was described in marketing material as ‘TV’s biggest villain’, said: ‘I would [sue] now that I know that you can.’  

‘To be honest, when it was all going down, I actually had a few friends that are lawyers and I got them to look over my contract and these contracts are so hectic, you’re pretty much handing over your life. They own you,’ she added.

‘It’s really had to try and get anything out of it because they’ve kind of covered their butt in every way.’ 

The 28-year-old, who is expecting her first child with boyfriend Jaxon Manuel in the coming weeks, said that it was difficult to overcome the reputational damage she suffered as a result of MAFS. 

‘It could open the floodgates’: Married At First Sight stars are considering legal action against Channel Nine over their ‘villain’ edits, after Seven’s historic payout to House Rules contestant Nicole Prince. Pictured: MAFS 2018 stars Davina Rankin and Dean Wells

‘I couldn’t go to events, I didn’t even look at my phone, I didn’t leave my house for months,’ she confessed.

The former glamour model also claimed she felt an overwhelming sense that people hated her everywhere she went as a result of her portrayal on the show.

‘Even people from my series that were not as villianised as much as me are still going through trauma,’ Davina added. 

Threats: On Wednesday, Davina Rankin (pictured) said that she is considering making a claim against Channel Nine and producers Endemol Shine Australia after she was portrayed in a negative light on Married At First Sight last year

Threats: On Wednesday, Davina Rankin (pictured) said that she is considering making a claim against Channel Nine and producers Endemol Shine Australia after she was portrayed in a negative light on Married At First Sight last year

Dean Wells, who had an ‘affair’ with Davina on MAFS, also spoke to Nova 96.9 on Wednesday about the House Rules decision and said it could open legal ‘floodgates’.

‘It totally could, it happens a lot. I spoke out about it and I’ve had five to six different reality TV people reach out to me and say, “Yeah, the same thing happened to me”. So it could open the floodgates for sure,’ he said.  

When asked if he was pushed into his ‘affair’ by producers, Dean said it was completely his decision and took responsibility for his actions. 

Ordeal: Davina, who is expecting her first child with boyfriend Jaxon Manuel in a few weeks, said it was difficult to overcome the reputational damage she suffered as a result of MAFS

Ordeal: Davina, who is expecting her first child with boyfriend Jaxon Manuel in a few weeks, said it was difficult to overcome the reputational damage she suffered as a result of MAFS

‘What I don’t take responsibility for is where they said I want a woman to obey me, when words like that never came out of my mouth. I never said anything like that, they stitched all that together, it was ridiculous,’ Dean said. 

‘Personally, I won’t be taking any further action. I do take responsibility. These days I’m fine with it but some people have suffered, especially from the last season of MAFS and my season of MAFS. I know some people are really struggling so I reckon there might be some cases there.’ 

It comes after Nicole Prince, who featured on season five of House Rules in 2017 with her friend Fiona Taylor, said she had lost work after being portrayed as a bully on the renovation show. 

She took legal action through the Workers Compensation Commission (WCC), which ruled in her favour and has published its findings in a damning 27-page report.  

Hated: The former glamour model also claimed she felt an overwhelming sense that people hated her everywhere she went as a result of her portrayal on the show

Hated: The former glamour model also claimed she felt an overwhelming sense that people hated her everywhere she went as a result of her portrayal on the show 

The Commission’s Arbitrator Cameron Burge ruled that Nicole was an ’employee’ of Channel Seven during her time on the show and that, during the course of her employment, she suffered a ‘psychological / psychiatric injury’. 

Seven has been ordered to compensate Nicole for her medical treatment in relation to the injury. 

The ruling could set a legal precedent allowing for disgruntled reality stars to take action against broadcasters if they’re not happy with their portrayal.

Landmark ruling: It comes after Nicole Prince (right), who featured on House Rules in 2017 with Fiona Taylor (left), said she had lost work after being portrayed as a bully on the renovation show. After taking legal action, Channel Seven has been ordered to pay Nicole compensation

Landmark ruling: It comes after Nicole Prince (right), who featured on House Rules in 2017 with Fiona Taylor (left), said she had lost work after being portrayed as a bully on the renovation show. After taking legal action, Channel Seven has been ordered to pay Nicole compensation

WCC’s ruling ‘a game changer’ for television industry

‘The ruling by the WCC could be a game changer for the industry,’ says Rob McKnight, a former Channel 10 producer and editor of TV Blackbox.

‘Now, any contestant that feels they have been mistreated by television producers will have cause for taking action. A precedent has been set that could change what we see on TV. 

‘No longer will producers be able to push contestants to their very limits simply because they’ve made them sign their lives away. This ruling shows production companies will have to take full responsibility for the welfare of those contestants, just like they would any other employee. 

‘It’s likely this ruling will lead to legal action by previous contestants who feel they were treated unfairly by the production companies making these shows.

‘Networks have always said they have a duty of care, but the ruling that these contestants are actually employees is a a game changer for the industry because there’s no doubt contestants are pushed to the very limits during production. They are sleep deprived, liquored up and prompted to say things they don’t actually mean.

‘The industry right now will be taking a moment to reassess what this all means and it’s likely to change what we see at home. Will these reality TV shows become less dramatic? It’s very possible.

‘We’ve just heard Married at First sight has halted production due to the welfare of one of the contestants. It shows there are severe consequences to playing with peoples emotions. I don’t think we’ve heard the last of this.’

Read more at DailyMail.co.uk