Heather Reid took Stan Dukic to the ACT Supreme Court over nine posts Mr Dukic, a former Canberra FC coach, had published on the social media site.

On Friday, Justice John Burns ruled in favour of Ms Reid, ordering Mr Dukic pay her $182,700.

Of that amount, $20,000 was awarded for aggravated damages, after Mr Dukic wrote to both court staff and Ms Reid's lawyers saying he would "gladly" file for bankruptcy if orders were made against him.

In an email to Ms Reid's lawyers, he also threatened to release a statement about her "breaking the law".

Justice Burns ordered Mr Dukic be restrained from publishing the posts or similar comments again.

In awarding damages, Justice Burns said it was relevant that Mr Dukic's Facebook profile was public.

"The effect of this is that the defendant's posts on Facebook were accessible to anyone, whether they were a friend of the defendant's on Facebook, a Facebook user or someone that was neither."

Mr Dukic had published the nine posts over a year from January 13, 2015 to December 8, 2015..

Justice Burns said that Mr Dukic had about 400 "friends" on Facebook, and that each post was liked or commented on by between five and 23 people.

Four posts stayed online for more than 320 days.

But Justice Burns also accepted that the number of likes or comments a post received was not representative of the extent of publication.

Ms Reid said multiple defamatory imputations could be drawn from the posts, including that she was dishonest, a habitual liar, that she performed her role with such gross incompetence the Minister for Sport should intervene, and that she is gender-biased in favour of the women's football code.

Since he was served with Ms Reid's statement of claim on January 12 this year, Mr Dukic has declined to take part in the court proceedings.

Mr Dukic did not file a defence or intention to respond to Ms Reid's defamation claim. He was informed about a default judgement hearing on May 6, but declined to attend.

As a result, a default judgement was entered in favour of Ms Reid on May 12. Mr Dukic also did not appear at a costs hearing on October 14 before Justice Burns.

The judge noted that as a result of the default judgement, the posts were defamatory and that damage to Ms Reid's reputation was presumed.

"It is clear the material contained within the defendants posts are baseless," Justice Burns said.

"They were a sustained, repetitive attack on the plaintiff's reputation and character that demonstrated no sign of abating in circumstances where the plaintiff had no opportunity to comment prior to them being published."

He said it was clear from witnesses' evidence, and the number of awards and honours she had received, that she was a person of good reputation.

Ms Reid stepped down in April after 12 years in the job, pointing to growing abuse in the past few years, both in person and on social media.