Date:
20130129
Docket:
T-6-13
Citation:
2013 FC 89
Toronto, Ontario, January 29,
2013
PRESENT: Kevin R. Aalto, Esquire, Prothonotary
BETWEEN:
|
|
THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA
|
|
|
|
Applicant
|
|
and
|
|
|
MAJOR KEYVAN
NOURHAGHIGHI
|
|
|
|
Respondent
|
|
|
|
|
REASONS FOR
ORDER AND ORDER
[1]
This
application is brought by the Law Society of Upper Canada to have the
Respondent, Mr. Nourhaghighi, declared a vexatious litigant pursuant to s. 40
(1) of the Federal Courts Act and barring him from initiating any
further proceedings in this Court without leave of a Judge of this Court. It
is similar to another application in this Court being Court File No. T-2285-12
brought by Her Majesty the Queen which also seeks to have Mr. Nourhaghighi
declared a vexatious litigant pursuant to s. 40 (1) of the Federal Courts
Act.
[2]
The
Respondent, Mr. Nourhaghighi, brings this motion for an order:
(a).
Striking
the Notice of Application;
(b).
Costs
to be fixed at $1500.00, to be paid forthwith, in any event of the cause, to
the Honourable Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi;
[3]
This
motion is similar to a motion brought by Mr. Nourhaghighi in Court File No.
T-2285-12 which was heard by the Honourable Mr. Justice Beaudry on January 14,
2013 who issued an Order dated January 14, 2013 dismissing the motion and
awarding costs to Her Majesty the Queen.
[4]
At
the outset of the hearing the Court commenced by posing a question to Mr.
Nourhaghighi. Mr. Nourhaghighi did not respond to the question posed by the
Court. The question was to the effect of “Why isn’t this motion to be dealt
with on the same basis as the motion last Monday in which Justice Beaudry of
this Court dismissed your motion to strike T-2285-12?” [Her Majesty the
Queen, Applicant v. Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi, Court File No. T-2285-12,
Order of Justice Beaudry dated January 14, 2013]. Rather than answer the
question, Mr. Nourhaghighi then launched into a specious attack on the Court
alleging bias and conflict of interest against the Court. Mr. Nourhaghighi
demanded that the Court withdraw because of the alleged bias and conflict of
interest.
[5]
Mr.
Nourhaghighi pointed to a reference in his motion record in which a direction
had been given by the Court to officers of the Courts Administration Services
and it was alleged by Mr. Nourhaghighi that these directions were the
foundation of contempt proceedings.
[6]
There
is no doubt that Mr. Nourhaghighi has made allegations of bias and contempt
against many individuals including not only lawyers acting on matters against
Mr. Nourhaghighi, judges who have dealt with his matters, Federal Court
Registry Officers and staff, members of Provincial and Federal Governments and
an array of others. A contempt motion brought by Mr. Nourhaghighi against
lawyers, registry staff of the Federal Court and others was summarily dismissed
by Justice Near by Order dated September 18, 2012 [Nourhaghighi v. MCI,
2012 FC 1087].
[7]
As
the hearing continued, Mr. Nourhaghighi maintained his allegation of bias and
conflict against the Court and further advised that the Court would be a
witness in a proceeding in the Federal Court of Appeal and therefore the Court
should withdraw.
[8]
During
the course of these submissions, the Court endeavoured to pose questions to Mr.
Nourhaghighi regarding the alleged bias and conflict. Mr. Nourhaghighi
continued making submissions while the Court was speaking. The Court was
endeavouring to pose questions to Mr. Nourhaghighi and seek clarification of
Mr. Nourhaghighi’s position. Mr. Nourhaghighi did not stop talking and in a
most disrespectful manner continued without listening to the Court’s admonitions.
In an effort to get Mr. Nourhaghighi’s attention the Court emphatically
requested that Mr. Nourhaghighi refrain from speaking while the Court was
speaking. Mr. Nourhaghighi then proceeded to advise the Court that as the
Court was “yelling” he was going to withdraw.
[9]
Mr.
Nourhaghighi then withdrew from the Court.
[10]
Mr.
Nourhaghighi’s conduct was nothing short of contemptuous and disrespectful in
light of the fact that he refused to stop talking and respond properly to the directions
of the Court. Mr. Nourhaghighi’s conduct brings the administration of justice
into disrepute when he endeavours to direct the Court process without regard to
courtroom decorum and the directions of the Court.
[11]
Notwithstanding
that Mr. Nourhaghighi chose to withdraw from the Court, the Court continued
with the proceeding and sought submissions from the Applicant.
[12]
In
all of the circumstances, it is my view that there is no basis to support Mr.
Nourhaghighi’s request that I recuse myself. Nothing in his materials in way
suggests that I should not hear this motion. The references made by Mr.
Nourhaghighi to my involvement by way of providing directions on a matter on a
prior occasion do not, in any way, impact the position on this motion nor put
me in a position of conflict or bias. His position that somehow I am a witness
in a Federal Court of Appeal matter is baseless. In any event, this motion by
Mr. Nourhaghighi falls squarely within the four corners of the decision of the
Honourable Mr. Justice Beaudry of January 14, 2013 [HMQ v. Nourhaghighi,
Court File No. T-2285-12]. For the reasons given by Justice Beaudry, this
motion is also dismissed.
[13]
The
Applicant seeks its costs of this motion on a substantial indemnity basis. The
Applicant points to various factors including the unsubstantiated malicious
allegations of Mr. Nourhaghighi in his motion record for which there is no
evidence and the contemptuous behaviour of Mr. Nourhaghighi in Court today.
More specifically, the unsubstantiated malicious allegations which the
Applicant refers to are set out in the “Grounds” section of Mr. Nourhaghighi’s
motion record and specifically paragraph 1(f) which reads as follows:
The
Applicant, its lawyers’ members and its parties sharing liability with the
Toronto Police and RCMP that assaulted and tortured Major [Mr. Nourhaghighi],
numerously; yet the Majority of Judges condemned the Applicant’s and its
parties by awards to Major;
[14]
There
are two footnotes in this paragraph. The first footnote refers to the Toronto
Police and reads “Justice Cadsby Oral Judgment who found police tortured
Major”. By happenstance, Mr. Nourhaghighi endeavoured to file a document with
the Court on or about December 24, 2012 entitled a “NOTICE OF CLAIM AS AGAINST
DEFENDANTS”. The named Defendants to whom the Notice is directed are John
Loncar, Brad Gotkin, Roger Flaim, The Ontario Department of Justice, Mario
Sepe, Jack Schutz, Andrew Murray, Michael Switzer, Daniel Gosselin, The Courts
Administration Service, Stephan Stebesky, The Minister of Citizenship and
Immigration, The Attorney General of Canada, Her Majesty The Queen in Right of
Ontario, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada et al. The intended claim,
as it states, relates to:
“.
. . bias, hostility and/or negligence of the Defendants caused special and
general damages to us [the document also refers to Farzad Nour Haghighi as a
claimant] in which the Defendants by unlawful interception of my private
communications, thefts of my properties, and interference with medical care
entitled us in law for aggravated and special damages too for harms that the
Defendants intentionally committed against us with bad faith and dishonestly in
accordance with illegal agreements and Perjury in Affidavits and Fraud in
the Federal Court Data of Entry.” [emphasis in the original]
[15]
There
are other allegations made in the document but more importantly, attached to
this document is the transcript of the decision of Judge Cadsby of the Ontario Provincial Court dated November 27, 1997. Mr. Nourhaghighi had been charged with
two counts of assault which charges were dismissed for reasons given by Judge
Cadsby. There is no finding whatsoever that Judge Cadsby found that Mr.
Nourhaghighi was “tortured”. The footnote is entirely incorrect and is an
effort by Mr. Nourhaghighi to mislead this Court.
[16]
The
second footnote is at the end of the paragraph and reads “Federal Court; All
levels of the Courts in Ontario; Security Intelligence Review
Committee.” Neither this footnote nor the prior footnote in any way
substantiates the claims of Mr. Nourhaghighi.
[17]
Quite
apart from his misleading motion materials, there is no doubt that Mr.
Nourhaghighi’s conduct, in my view, was disrespectful to the Court as he
refused to stop talking in the face of questions from the Court. Mr.
Nourhaghighi for all of his many appearances in this Court does not run the
Court system, does not dictate what matters will be heard and by whom, and,
most assuredly, does not run this Court. In all of the circumstances, it is my
view that an award of $1,500.00 for costs is appropriate.
ORDER
THIS COURT
ORDERS that
1.
This
motion is dismissed.
2.
Costs
payable forthwith by the Respondent in the amount of $1,500.00 is awarded to
the Applicant.
“Kevin
R. Aalto”
Email this Content