Following a final hearing that Rogaris did not attend, the NSW Supreme Court awarded judgment to the clients for their stolen money and just over $43,000 in interest. Rogaris and the firm were also restrained from diminishing the value of assets below $499,979.

The conduct has already been referred to police.

Justice Michael Slattery said Rogaris and Castle Law held themselves out as “professional advisors” to create a relationship of trust.

“They created a situation of vulnerability for the plaintiffs. That situation attracted the necessary elements for the creation of a traditionally accepted fiduciary relationship akin to the solicitor/client relationship which the plaintiffs were induced to believe existed,” Justice Slattery determined.

Having already worked with Rogaris in the past, the clients approached him in August 2024 to assist with the purchase of a Turramurra property and the sale of an existing property.

VIEW ALL

Upon receiving settlement funds, the clients noticed they received about $80,000 less than they expected, but they were told by Rogaris that the amount had been withdrawn to satisfy a stamp duty payment. By that stage, Castle Law held a total of $187,000 on so-called trust for stamp duty, but this was $23,091 more than was needed.

On or about 28 January this year, the day prior to settlement, the clients were advised by a “consultant solicitor” and colleague of Rogaris that it could not be completed because Castle Law’s trust account had not been linked to a property settlement platform with the required amount for stamp duty and a 5 per cent deposit.

When the clients got Rogaris on the phone, they were told the settlement issue was an “administrative error” and were asked to deposit an additional $330,000 “to ensure settlement proceeded”.

For several weeks, Rogaris made up excuses for his failure to return the $330,000 and eventually stopped responding at all.

On 26 February, the clients received a call from a woman who said she was Rogaris’ mother, who informed them he had allegedly been charged by police on unrelated matters and refused bail.

The following month, the clients received a letter from Revenue NSW requesting a payment of $18,401 for stamp duty on a property they had purchased with Rogaris’ assistance in June 2024.

The consultant solicitor informed them that Rogaris lodged a First Home Buyers Assistance Scheme application for that property without instructions and despite the clients not being eligible. Attempts to call Rogaris or Castle Law were unsuccessful.

After they commenced the Supreme Court proceedings, the clients learnt Rogaris applied for a stamp duty exemption on a 2021 property sale under the category “break-up of marriage, de facto relationship or domestic relationship”. The clients told the court they were married and had never been divorced or separated.

Rogaris, who had told the clients to transfer $108,442 for the 2021 property, had invented the fiction to keep the stamp duty sum.

The case: Eftekharzadeh-Mashhadi v Rogaris [2025] NSWSC 523 (23 May 2025)