Login
Threatening Facebook message about bigamy lands lawyer in hot water
Years on from an unsatisfactory professional conduct finding, an NSW solicitor was unable to shake a reprimand for accusing a man of bigamy in a threatening and intimidating message over social media.
Naomi Neilson
Anne Kazas-Rogaris, from the Parramatta-based firm KR Lawyers and Consultants, was unsuccessful in overturning a decision she engaged in unsatisfactory professional conduct by sending a threatening Facebook message in May 2017.
“The authorities say that practitioners must be extremely careful before resorting to any even arguably threatening conduct and are well advised to err on the side of caution. The solicitor did not do so,” Balla and Fairlie said in their written reasons.
In mid-2017, Kazas-Rogaris was representing a woman who alleged her husband left for the Philippines to pursue multiple relationships, including marriage, and was trying to sell their matrimonial home.
The woman attended Kazas-Rogaris’ office “virtually every day” for help because she alleged she was receiving harassing messages from women who claimed to be in a relationship with her husband.
On 20 May 2017, Kazas-Rogaris prepared a file note to record that the woman feared for her safety, “feels she would lose her mind”, and requested Kazas-Rogaris respond to one of the women.
In the first of two messages, sent to a sister of the husband’s girlfriend, Kazas-Rogaris alleged the girlfriend was “committing bigotry” – but later submitted she meant “bigamy” – because the husband “is still legally married, and his wife is our client”.
Kazas-Rogaris added: “We will take action against him. Tell your sister to obtain legal advice regarding this matter.”
In the second message, Kazas-Rogaris alleged the husband was a bigamist, “which is illegal in your country too”.
In April 2022, the professional conduct committee of the Council of the Law Society of NSW found it was satisfied that Kazas-Rogaris “grossly exceeded a legitimate assertion” of her client’s rights by asserting the husband was “committing the crime of bigamy”.
The committee noted Kazas-Rogaris did not have evidence the husband and girlfriend were married, “and intimidated or misled the sister by informing her that the husband and girlfriend had already broken the law when it was not apparent that they had”.
During a recent hearing, Kazas-Rogaris’ solicitor attempted to downplay the messages, including by asserting that the phrase “we will take action against him” was unclear and could mean she would take action against the husband to progress the family law dispute.
“We do not accept that submission. In the context of the whole message, the meaning is perfectly clear – the husband is committing bigamy while married to the wife, which is a crime in respect of which action will be taken by the solicitor,” Balla and Fairlie said.
Balla and Fairlie added it was inappropriate to threaten action without specifying which type of action, “leaving open the reasonable possibility of legal or other law enforcement action when there was no basis in fact or law to apprehend a crime had been committed”.
While they had some sympathy for Kazas-Rogaris’ position, particularly given the highly emotional state of her client, Balla and Fairlie said a competent and diligent solicitor would have “confined their assistance to actions consistent with their ethical obligations”.
“As submitted by the Law Society, the solicitor should have told the wife that she could not do what was being asked of her, and if that was not acceptable, terminated the client-solicitor relationship,” they said.
The case is Kazas-Rogaris v Council of the Law Society of New South Wales [2024] NSWCATOD 166 (15 October 2024).
Naomi Neilson
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
