The Applicant had notarized a notice that was referred to by Rooke A.C.J. (as he then was) as “obnoxious” and of “no legal effect”, and concluded that by notarizing the notice, the Applicant failed in her duties as a notary and in her professional duties as a lawyer.

The Applicant provided the Court with written submissions as to why she should not be held liable for a $10,000 fine to be paid to the Court under Rule 10.49. Nonetheless, the Court imposed the penalty. The Rule allows the Court to impose penalties if it finds that a lawyer contravened the Rules or interfered with the proper or efficient administration of Justice.

The Applicant sought permission to Appeal the penalty. Justice Martin held that there was no other forum to which the Applicant could Appeal and, therefore, permission was not required.  The Applicant could Appeal as of right.