Decision in brief: Ontario Securities Commission v Aziz, Enforcement Proceeding, Merits and Sanctions and Costs, May 26, 2026
Ontario Securities Commission v Aziz, 2026 ONCMT 24
In this enforcement case, the OSC alleged that Aziz did not comply with the Tribunal’s earlier order permanently banning him from being a director or officer of any company. The OSC said that, despite that order, Aziz continued to be a director and officer of seven companies.
The Tribunal decided that Aziz broke the Tribunal’s order because he continued to be a director and officer of seven companies. Although Aziz said that he did not intend to break the order, the Tribunal found that this did not change the fact that he had broken it.
The Tribunal then decided what sanctions were appropriate. Breaking a Tribunal order is very serious. Aziz did not try to comply with the order before receiving a warning from the OSC and is still an officer of one company. His sanctions should make it clear to him and others that Tribunal orders must be followed.
The fact that Aziz had difficulties resigning, that the companies were inactive, and that Aziz was not paid did not make the breach less serious. However, his breach was not the most serious because Aziz said that he always intended to comply with the order and made genuine efforts to do so.
Because its earlier order already permanently banned Aziz from being a director or officer of any company, the Tribunal did not order an additional ban. It did order him to resign from any remaining director or officer role.
The Tribunal decided that Aziz must pay an administrative penalty of $22,000. This amount reflects how long the breach continued and the number of companies involved.
In its written reply to Aziz’s submissions, the OSC argued for a higher penalty based on the calculation used in a recent Tribunal decision. The Tribunal did not use that calculation because Aziz had not been given a fair chance to respond to that argument.
Finally, the Tribunal decided that Aziz must pay costs to the OSC of $7,757.50. That is a slight reduction from the amount the OSC asked for to exclude costs not directly attributable to this case.