Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Mohammed Jaffar alleged TD Bank discriminated against him on grounds of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, and/or religion by restricting his banking services after depositing flagged cheques.

• The CHRC dismissed the complaint, finding no evidentiary link between the negative treatment and the alleged grounds of discrimination under section 5 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

• TD's automated risk management detection tool flagged the deposits — two stale-dated cheques and one previously endorsed cheque — without any knowledge of the Applicant's race, national or ethnic origin, colour, or religion.

• Applicant's Charter arguments failed as the Court held the Charter does not regulate private interactions between an individual and their bank absent a connection to government action.

• Procedural fairness claims were rejected, including the argument that the bank representative who opened the account should have been interviewed and that TD breached the Bank Act's written notice requirements.

• The Federal Court applied the reasonableness standard of review per Vavilov and found the Applicant had not established a reviewable error, dismissing the judicial review application with no order as to costs.

The facts of the case

Mohammed Jaffar, a Black, Muslim man, opened a bank account with the Toronto-Dominion Bank on August 23, 2019. The following day, on August 24, 2019, he deposited three cheques into his new account through TD's mobile banking application. These cheques were automatically flagged by TD's risk management detection tool. Two of the cheques were stale-dated beyond six months, and one cheque was returned as it had already been previously endorsed.

Account restrictions and TD's complaint process

On September 5, 2019, Mr. Jaffar attended an in-person meeting at a TD branch where he was informed that his account was on hold because of the flagged transactions. The bank advised him that he could continue to access his account through a cash card that would allow him to withdraw funds; however, deposits would have to be made in person, rather than through an ATM or mobile banking. Unsatisfied with this approach, Mr. Jaffar initiated the first step of TD's "Customer Problem Resolution Process," a three-step internal complaint mechanism that escalates from voicing the complaint with the relevant banking service, to the customer care unit, and ultimately to TD's Senior Customer Complaints Office or the Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investigations.

Escalation and account closure threat

On September 10, 2019, Mr. Jaffar returned to a TD branch to complete an in-person transfer, which was denied. He asserts that he was advised by TD that they were going to close his account due to "suspected fraudulent transactions." On September 16, 2019, TD sent a letter advising that his account "would be exited" effective October 21, 2019, and that TD would return any remaining funds to the Applicant by mail. Mr. Jaffar escalated his concerns to Step 2 of the Complaint Process on October 7, 2019. He asserts that after this, he received multiple calls from TD proposing temporary solutions, including requiring him to use a cash card for six months and, if there were no irregularities during this period, he would be provided with a regular access card. Mr. Jaffar refused these conditions. On November 5, 2019, TD responded to the Step 2 complaint, advising that its fraud department had reviewed the matter again but would not revise its decision to place restrictions on the Applicant's access to his account.

Ombudsman intervention and complaint to the CHRC

On April 12, 2020, Mr. Jaffar initiated Step 3 of the Complaint Process by filing a complaint with the TD Ombudsman. On November 16, 2020, the TD Ombudsman's Office informed him that his account had been reinstated and that he could go into any TD bank to get a new access card. An official letter of decision from the Ombudsman Office was delivered to the Applicant on November 23, 2020. Mr. Jaffar subsequently filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission on August 5, 2021, alleging that TD had discriminated against him in the provision of a service on the grounds of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, and/or religion by treating him in an adverse differential manner contrary to section 5 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. He sought to mediate the dispute through the CHRC in June 2022; however, his scheduled mediation was cancelled on July 5, 2022 as it was deemed inappropriate for mediation, and the file was sent for further investigation and assessment.

The cheque hold policy at issue

A key element in the case involved TD's disclosed cheque hold policy, which was provided to Mr. Jaffar when he opened his account. Under the heading "Cheque Hold Periods," the policy stated that TD may make the maximum hold period on deposited cheques longer than the standard time period if the date on the cheques is more than six months prior to the date on which the deposit was made. The CHRC found that the restrictions imposed on Mr. Jaffar's banking privileges were related to cheques he deposited which had been issued more than six months before the date the account was opened, in addition to one that was returned NSF. In the CHRC's view, TD's decision to impose conditions on Mr. Jaffar's banking options was consistent with its policy which was disclosed to him when he opened his account. The Applicant also raised paragraph 627.24(2)(a) of the Bank Act, SC 1991, c 46, which requires banks to provide a written statement indicating they will not be making funds available. However, the Court found this provision was not triggered because the Applicant made the relevant deposits via mobile banking, and TD's obligation to provide a written statement under subsection 627.24(2) would only have been triggered upon the Applicant's request. The Applicant did not provide any evidence of such a request.

The CHRC investigation and decision

On May 29, 2024, the Investigator issued their Report recommending that the CHRC dismiss the complaint. In preparing their Report, the Investigator reviewed all information submitted by the parties and interviewed Mr. Jaffar, the Senior Manager of TD's Canadian Fraud Operations, and the TD Ombudsman Investigator. The Investigator agreed with the Applicant that negative treatment had occurred in that he was not permitted to access typical banking services. However, the Investigator disagreed that there was a reasonable basis in the evidence to support a finding that the negative treatment could be linked directly or indirectly to race, national or ethnic origin, colour, and/or religion. The Investigator instead found the Applicant was prevented from accessing typical banking services because of the nature of the Applicant's deposits and the close proximity of the deposits to his having newly opened an account with TD. On July 15, 2024, the CHRC dismissed the complaint under subparagraph 44(3)(b)(i) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, finding that an inquiry into the complaint was not warranted.

The judicial review and the Court's ruling

Mr. Jaffar applied for judicial review of the CHRC's decision before the Federal Court. He represented himself at the oral hearing held on February 11, 2026, in Edmonton, Alberta. He argued the decision was unreasonable because it did not recognize that there was no policy basis for TD's adverse differential treatment, that the decision was not based on the evidence, and that it disproportionally infringed on his rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He also raised procedural fairness concerns, contending that the TD representative who opened his bank account was not interviewed as part of the investigation, and that TD failed to follow paragraph 627.24(2)(a) of the Bank Act. Madam Justice Furlanetto found that none of Mr. Jaffar's arguments established a reviewable error with the Decision. The Court held that the Charter does not regulate private interactions between an individual and their bank and that to raise a breach under the Charter, there must be some connection to government action. On procedural fairness, the Court noted that other evidence revealed that TD does not retain information about a customer's race, national or ethnic origin, colour or religion in its records, and that TD's automated risk management detection tool did not know the Applicant's race, national or ethnic origin, colour or religion when the deposits were made and flagged. The Court further noted that the Investigator tried to contact all customer service agents mentioned by the Applicant, but messages were not returned. The application for judicial review was dismissed in favour of the Toronto-Dominion Bank, with no order as to costs. No specific monetary amount was awarded or ordered, as the case concerned the dismissal of a human rights complaint rather than a damages claim.