Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Appellant challenged enforcement of a $2,500 cost order issued after dismissal of his employment-related human rights complaint.

• Claimed procedural unfairness due to insufficient time for oral argument and inability to submit a responding affidavit.

• Sought reconsideration of an enforcement order allowing seizure and sale of property.

• Alleged false statements by the Bank of Canada concerning communication during cost enforcement proceedings.

• Disputed enforceability of the cost order during an ongoing appeal.

• The Federal Court of Appeal upheld lower court rulings and found no legal or procedural error justifying intervention.

Facts and outcome of the case

Hesameddin Abbaspour Tazehkand filed a human rights complaint against the Bank of Canada following a rejected job application. The Canadian Human Rights Commission dismissed the complaint, prompting Tazehkand to seek judicial review at the Federal Court. That application was also dismissed, and the Court awarded the Bank $2,500 in costs. Tazehkand appealed the dismissal to the Federal Court of Appeal, which in 2023 upheld the lower court’s ruling.

The present case involves two appeals stemming from subsequent proceedings related to the enforcement of that $2,500 costs award. The first was Tazehkand’s challenge to a Federal Court enforcement order that permitted the Bank to seize and sell his property to recover the award. He argued the enforcement was premature due to a pending appeal. The Federal Court rejected this argument and refused his motion for reconsideration. It also denied his request to submit a responding affidavit.

The second appeal focused on a separate motion where the Bank had requested security for costs. The Federal Court dismissed the Bank’s request, meaning Tazehkand was not required to post security. However, Tazehkand appealed anyway, not challenging the outcome but rather the reasons for judgment, which the Federal Court of Appeal noted is not a valid basis for appeal.

The appellate court affirmed that enforcement of a costs order is not stayed by an appeal unless ordered otherwise, citing Federal Courts Rules and relevant case law. It also dismissed all claims of procedural unfairness, concluding that Tazehkand was afforded a fair hearing with the standard amount of time for oral submissions.

In conclusion, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals with costs awarded to the Bank of Canada, reaffirming the enforceability of the original costs order and the correctness of the lower court’s procedural rulings.