"Courts do not always accept chat records, screenshots, and posts as reliable evidence. Generally, your conversation with anyone on social media will be regarded as documentary evidence. However, these conversations or screenshots are usually regarded as hearsay evidence by the court, and generally inadmissible unless it can be tendered through a witness or fall within an exception listed in the relevant legislation. On the other hand, data generated by any server, such as time and place, will generally be recognized as real evidence.  

However, due to the popularity and convenience of social media, many commercial activities have engaged in publicity work and negotiation directly via social media. In a 2017 case, private and group conversations in WeChat as well as advertisements posted were accepted as evidence by the court and played an important role in the case.  Furthermore, in another case, of Bauer Consumer Media Ltd v Mamamia.com.au Pty Ltd, the only evidence the court relied upon were social media and websites provided by both parties.  

Any information or posts you make on social media platforms can act in your favor in a matter, but others may also rely on it to use against you in a dispute or proceeding.  For example, a Ms. Lee claimed that a car accident caused impairment to her cognitive function, diminished her decision-making ability and concentration, and caused excessive stress that prevented her from maintaining social relationships. The case was going smoothly until the other side provided evidence regarding Ms. Lee’s social media posts. Ms. Lee regularly updates her account to document her busy social life She was also an enthusiastic Facebook gamer and posted many impressive high scores she had earned in the game. The evidence provided was clearly contradicting Ms. Lee’s previous claims. Consequently, the final judgement was far from what she expected.  

It is good you are collecting documentary evidence.  However, in addition, it would be best to consult a lawyer as soon as possible, both because the legal precedent is rapidly changing, and to ensure you do not respond in a way that could damage your case."
spam fails_task lang_mismatch pii not_appropriate hate_speech sexual_content quality toxicity humor helpfulness creativity violence