Let’s Go To The Videotape

A Hearing Committee Report of the Alberta Law Society has reprimanded an attorney

On or about July 14, 2022, Ms. Ovaici submitted to the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta (Court) and to other parties in a family law proceeding a video recording of the complainant in these proceedings and the husband of Ms. Ovaici’s client engaging in sexual activity. Neither the complainant nor the husband knew that they were being video recorded.

The attorney had represented the wife in a divorce

On May 10, 2022, Ms. Ovaici and counsel for the husband in the Proceedings (Husband) appeared in Family Docket Court before a Justice of the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta (Court Appearance).  During the Court Appearance, Ms. Ovaici represented to the Court that she had video evidence of the Husband’s abuse, that he was doing drugs in the home, and that he was bringing prostitutes into the matrimonial home, which she wished to submit to the Court for use in an Early Intervention Case Conference (EEIC – a ‘without prejudice’ proceeding). Neither the Justice nor counsel for the Husband had seen the video evidence. The Justice acceded to Ms. Ovaici’s request that she be permitted to submit her video evidence. A transcript of the Court Appearance was provided with the Agreed Statement.

The video evidence referred to by Ms. Ovaici during the Court Appearance had been recorded by the Wife, who had surreptitiously installed a video camera in the bedroom, under the parties’ matrimonial bed, facing the hallway, for the purpose of capturing the Husband’s abuse and drug abuse, as at the time, her client had no knowledge that he was bringing women to the family home. The recording was made in the parties’ matrimonial home. The video camera recorded the Complainant and the Husband engaging in sexual activity (Video Recording). Neither the Husband nor the Complainant were aware of the camera or that they were being video recorded. The Video Recording was provided to Ms. Ovaici by the Wife.

The Complainant is not a prostitute and, at the time that the Video Recording was recorded, the Complainant was in a relationship with the Husband.

Sanction

The Committee accepted the joint submissions of counsel for the LSA and counsel for Ms. Ovaici that the appropriate sanction in relation to Citation 1 is a reprimand. The Committee delivered the following reprimand to Ms. Ovaici at the hearing:

The Hearing Guide of the Law Society requires that Hearing Committees take a purposeful approach to sanctioning a member who has been found guilty of conduct deserving of sanction. The fundamental purpose of sanctioning is the protection of the best interests of the public and the protection of the reputation and standing of the legal profession generally.

You have admitted guilt to one citation. Your conduct brought the administration of justice into disrepute. This conduct represents the type of thing that the Law Society expects its members to avoid. The Law Society must ensure that the public has confidence that our members will protect the best interests of the public, and our members must protect the reputation and standing of the legal profession generally. You failed in this case.

As a Member of this Law Society, you will be expected to look at what you have done to determine whether you can improve on what’s happened, learn from this particular matter, and, of course, to move forward.

Ms. Ovaici, we acknowledge your co-operation with the Law Society in resolving this complaint by entering into a Statement of Admitted Facts and Admission of Guilt on one citation. Your admissions have permitted this citation to be resolved on a more efficient basis, which is not just a benefit to you, but is a benefit to the public and to the Law Society. You have also agreed to a Joint Submission on sanction, which is to be given deference by this Committee. Your cooperation in this regard helped to avoid unnecessary time and inconvenience to various parties and witnesses, as well as process costs. 

The Committee concludes that, in light of all of these circumstances and considerations, it is in the public interest to accept the Joint Submission.

In concluding, we wish you the best as you move forward from these difficult circumstances and thank you for your attendance today.

(Mike Frisch)