OKR: who gets to use what the monitor compels

A monitor's investigative powers are usually uncontroversial because nobody much minds where the answers go. In the OKR proceedings the answers have somewhere very specific to go, and that is the whole of the argument set down for September 11.

On July 17, 2026 Justice B.B. Johnston granted the monitor, PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc., what the order calls additional enhanced powers: authority to conduct investigations "including examinations under oath of any Person… other than the Alberta Securities Commission," and to compel production of books, records, accounting, documents, correspondence and contracts of any kind relating to the OKR entities. Examinations proceed by summons. And, "subject to section 5(2) of the Canada Evidence Act… no person shall be excused from answering any question on the ground that the answer to the question may tend to incriminate such Person or may tend to establish such Person's liability to a civil proceeding," per the Order re Stay Extension, Investigative Powers and Other Relief, July 17, 2026, paras. 6–7.

The order also contained its own escape valve. Paragraph 8 preserved the right of Randal Thompson, Jason Neale and 7865546 Canada Inc. to come back and seek a declaration that Rule 5.33 of the Alberta Rules of Court — the implied undertaking — applies to whatever the monitor obtains from them, provided any such application was heard within sixty days. On August 31, 2026, both did, per the Application of Randal Stewart Thompson, Aug. 31, 2026 and the Application of Jason Neale and 7865546 Canada Inc., Aug. 31, 2026.

Why it matters here and not everywhere

There are two civil actions running alongside this CCAA. The Investor Action, commenced August 30, 2022, is brought by twenty plaintiffs — eleven individuals, seven corporations and two trusts — who plead that they invested over $21 million in the OKR funds and who allege, among much else, misappropriation of investor capital and the use of new money to pay returns to existing investors "in a manner akin to a 'Ponzi Scheme'." The OKR Action followed on June 6, 2023. On January 9, 2026 the court ordered the two tried together, per the Affidavit #1 of C. Wong, affirmed Aug. 31, 2026, para. 2 and Exhibit "A" and the Order for Joint Trial, Jan. 9, 2026. Those are allegations in a pleading; none has been proven.

The joint trial order did something else that matters more to this application than to anything else in the case. Its paragraph 2 provides that information disclosed or evidence obtained under Parts 5 or 6 of the Rules in either action "shall form part of the record in both the Investor Action and the OKR Action, and may be used by any party adverse in interest as if such information had been originally disclosed, or evidence originally obtained, in both," per the Order for Joint Trial, Jan. 9, 2026, para. 2. Evidence that gets into one action is in both.

Then there is the fact the applicants put at the front of their briefs. The plaintiffs in both civil actions are represented by Jensen Shawa Solomon Duguid Hawkes LLP — and JSS is also the monitor's litigation counsel, a role the monitor's own sixth report describes when it recounts that "the Monitor (through its litigation counsel, Jensen Shawa Solomon Duguid Hawkes LLP ('JSS')) served a notice of application," per the Brief of Jason Neale and 7865546 Canada Inc., Aug. 31, 2026, paras. 24–25, 41.

There is a third destination. The Alberta Securities Commission issued a notice of hearing on December 22, 2025 naming Neale, Thompson and the former chief financial officer, alleging fraud under s. 93(1)(b) of the Securities Act in connection with "the unauthorized diversion of approximately $17.4 million of OKR investors' capital," per the Alberta Securities Commission, Notice of Hearing, Dec. 22, 2025, para. 15.1. Those allegations are also unproven; the merits hearing is listed for June 2027. The applicants note an asymmetry in the July order: the commission cannot be examined or compelled to produce records, but nothing in the order stops the monitor from handing compelled material to it, per the Brief of Law of Randal Stewart Thompson, Aug. 31, 2026, para. 56.

What the applicants ask for

Both are careful to say they are not resisting the examinations. Mr. Thompson's application states it plainly: "Mr. Thompson does not oppose the Monitor's exercise of the Additional Enhanced Powers Order and does not seek to excuse himself from answering or producing information. Rather, Mr. Thompson seeks confirmation that compelled evidence and records may only be used for the purposes of the CCAA Proceedings and not for litigation or hearings involving Mr. Thompson outside of the CCAA Proceedings," per the Application of Randal Stewart Thompson, Aug. 31, 2026, para. 30.