High Court Rules on Gobin Harbhajan’s Bank Account Closure

On Tuesday, High Court Judge Nicolas Pierre made a decision regarding Gobin Harbhajan, a former candidate for We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) and its current member. The ruling was in relation to Harbhajan’s challenge against Scotiabank’s decision to close his bank account, which he claimed was in good standing.

Judge Pierre concluded that banks have the right to close accounts without cause, as stated in the Personal Financial Services Agreement (PFSA). This agreement, which is part of account applications, allows for account terminations with 30 days’ notice. “This is an unconditional contractual right,” the judge noted, indicating that the bank doesn’t need to justify its decision.

The judge also urged Parliament to consider creating legislation for an independent entity to handle complaints related to account closures. This suggestion seems to stem from the importance of banking access in today’s digital age, where services are increasingly interconnected with government services.

“In other places, this gap has been filled by establishing a financial services ombudsperson,” Judge Pierre remarked. This role would oversee account closures, ensuring that banks act fairly and reasonably, rather than solely following contractual terms.

Furthermore, the judge pointed out that Harbhajan couldn’t prove that bank procedures had been unfair. The termination of the account was not something that could be challenged under public law, as, according to the judge, the bank does not manage anything related to government functions. “The obligation to observe procedural fairness is a public law obligation,” she reiterated.

On another note, the court denied the request to declare that WIN operates independently from individual members, with Judge Pierre commenting there was no substantial evidence regarding any sanctions imposed on the party or its candidates.

Scotiabank confirmed through an affidavit that Harbhajan’s account was suspended on August 7, 2025, and clarified that the letter sent did not cite any “violations” as a reason for the closure. Harbhajan alleges that his reputation has suffered because of his affiliation with WIN and believes the closure lacked legal justification.

In her ruling, the judge indicated that the bank’s representative was unaware of Harbhajan’s ties to WIN or whether any sanctions were in place against WIN leaders. Additionally, the bank denied any non-compliance with its policies or issues related to the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AMLCFT) Act.

While Harbhajan demonstrated his account was suspended and that he belonged to WIN, the judge pointed out that he needed to prove this action was politically motivated. “He hasn’t provided convincing evidence that his political beliefs were the cause,” she stated, adding that claims about all WIN members’ accounts being closed were unproven. Simple allegations aren’t enough to justify his claims.

Finally, the judge dismissed Harbhajan’s assertions regarding violations of the AMLCFT Act. She clarified that these obligations primarily exist between the bank and the state, not individuals. Furthermore, she mentioned that he hadn’t specified any parts of the AMLCFT Act that grant individuals the right to pursue damages for alleged non-compliance, emphasizing that a breach doesn’t automatically lead to legal action without clear legislative intent.