Two members of the Law Society of Alberta notarized documents that were identified as part of Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument (“OPCA”) schemes. These documents were submitted to the Alberta Court of King’s Bench and led to penalties under Rule 10.49(1). The penalties were initially imposed but later successfully appealed before the Alberta Court of Appeal, leading the remission of the matter to the Court of King’s Bench for reconsideration.

The Court, after reviewing the materials notarized by Ms. Akpan and Mr. Kotyk, concluded that Ms. Akpan and Mr. Kotyk should be evaluated for possible Rule 10.49(1) penalties. Since the facts and legal issues in these two matters were very closely related, the Court conducted both Rule 10.49(1) proceedings together in the interests of judicial economy, and so that Ms. Akpan and Mr. Kotyk have a broad context in which to present their arguments and evidence.

Rule 10.49(1) raised three issues, namely: 1) Did Ms. Akpan and/or Mr. Kotyk contravene or fail to comply with Court processes and directions, that “has interfered with or may interfere with the proper or efficient administration of justice”; 2) If so, did they have an “adequate excuse” for that misconduct; 3) If no adequate excuse exists, what is the penalty amount that should be imposed.

The Court emphasized the importance of notaries adhering to legal standards and not facilitating OPCA schemes. The Court also referenced multiple legal and regulatory sources outlining the responsibilities and restrictions on notaries in Alberta, highlighting the serious nature of the misconduct by notarizing documents associated with OPCA strategies. Therefore, the Court concluded that it would reconsider the imposition of Rule 10.49(1) penalties on Ms. Akpan and Mr. Kotyk. The Court noted that the process will be conducted on a document-only basis, with a decision to be issued after reviewing their written arguments and Affidavit evidence.