Three individuals, under the influence of a UnitedWeStandPeople scheme, engaged in abusive litigation to evade debt obligations. They employed pseudolaw arguments, including demands for "wet ink" signatures and proof of non-securitization of debts, to frustrate legitimate debt collection processes.

Justice Nielsen ultimately concluded that if people want to advance known and rejected not-law claims in relation to their debts, they may be required “to put their money where their mouth is” and take steps to establish their litigation and intentions are genuine.

In coming to this conclusion, Nielsen J. stated that a person conducting Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument (“OPCA”)-based litigation breaches all the foundational principles for how civil litigation must be conducted in Alberta, as set out in Rule 1.2 of the Rules of Court. The Court’s negative conclusions as to the character of wet ink signature and securitization arguments meant that someone who engages in these strategies presumptively breaches Rule 1.2 with a bad faith motive, ulterior purpose, and abusive illegitimate objective.

The three individuals and the promoters of the UnitedWeStandPeople scheme were given a deadline to pay Security for Costs ordered, and to provide argument and/or Affidavit evidence as to why they should not be subject to additional penalties pursuant to Rule 10.49(1).

In calculating the lump sum quantum of the Costs Award, the Court considered the presumption under Rule 10.29(1) that a successful party is entitled to Costs, and the factors for calculating the quantum of those Costs pursuant to Rule 10.33(1), with a view of the abusive OPCA character of the lawsuit.

The Court further found that the promoters of the UnitedWeStandPeople scheme, Kevin Kumar and Colton Kumar, should be held jointly and severally liable for Costs to deter further abuse and ensure fairness to the lenders. However, Justice Nielsen afforded them the opportunity to submit evidence and arguments to avoid penalties, emphasizing the need for genuine intentions and compliance with Court Orders.