Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1147 (CanLII) : Procedural Fairness – PR Application Refused Without Considering Documents Submitted by the Applicant

In Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1147, the Federal Court granted judicial review of a refusal of an application for permanent residence under the Spouse or Common-Law Partner in Canada Class. The Court found that the Officer breached procedural fairness by deciding the application on an incomplete record, where numerous documents submitted by the Applicant in response to a procedural fairness letter were missing from the record before the decision-maker.

Background

The Applicant, an Indian citizen living in Ontario with her Canadian permanent resident spouse, applied for permanent residence. IRCC issued a procedural fairness letter stating that the evidence of their relationship and cohabitation was insufficient and requested extensive supporting documents, including leases, tax documents, utility bills, joint financial records, photographs, communications, and evidence concerning their relationship.

The Applicant responded by email with 19 PDF documents, followed by another submission containing 19 additional documents before the deadline. IRCC nevertheless refused the application, stating that the requested documentation had not been properly submitted.

Key Principles

• Right to Have the Complete Record Considered

Procedural fairness requires that an applicant have a meaningful opportunity to be heard. Where documents are properly submitted but it is unclear whether they reached the decision-maker, the decision may be procedurally unfair.

• Missing Documents Cannot Be Assumed to Be Irrelevant

The Court rejected the argument that the missing documents would not have changed the outcome. It held that the Court cannot speculate about what the Officer might have decided had the missing evidence been considered.

• The Right to Be Heard Is Fundamental

Although applicants for permanent residence generally receive a relatively low degree of procedural fairness, the failure to consider evidence actually submitted strikes at the basic right to be heard.

Court Findings

The Court found that the Certified Tribunal Record did not contain the Applicant’s March 24 email or any of its 19 attachments, nor 10 attachments from her earlier March 21 submission. There was also no reference to these missing documents in the GCMS notes.

The Respondent argued that the missing evidence would not have changed the decision because some requested documents, including certain tax forms and a lease, remained outstanding. The Court rejected this reasoning because the missing documents included explanations that could potentially have affected the Officer’s assessment.

Outcome

The Federal Court granted judicial review, set aside the refusal, and returned the application to a different IRCC officer for redetermination. The Court also directed that all documents attached to the Applicant’s March 21 and March 24 emails form part of the record to be considered in the redetermination.

Case Citation:

Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1147 (CanLII)