Introduction
The
Federal Court reviewed the refusal of a Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP)
application where the applicant completed his final academic year on a
part-time basis. The visa officer refused the application solely because the
applicant was not enrolled full-time, without considering the PGWP Program
Delivery Instructions that exempt students who are part-time only during their
final academic session. The Court held that the decision was unreasonable and
returned the matter for reconsideration.
Key
Principle
Visa
officers assessing PGWP applications must consider all applicable Program
Delivery Instructions, including the exception permitting part-time studies
during an applicant’s final academic session. A refusal that ignores a directly
applicable policy exception is unreasonable and cannot later be justified by
arguments advanced during judicial review.
Background
The
applicant, a graduate of York University, completed his bachelor’s degree in
April 2022. During his final academic session (Fall/Winter 2021), he took only
two remaining courses and therefore studied part-time. He subsequently applied
for a PGWP. The visa officer refused the application, stating simply that
applicants must be enrolled full-time to qualify, without addressing the
exception contained in the Program Delivery Instructions for students who are
part-time only during their final academic session.
Court Findings
- Officer Failed to Consider the Final Academic Session Exception
The
Court found that the officer’s reasons demonstrated no consideration of the
applicable exception in the PGWP Program Delivery Instructions. The refusal
simply stated that the applicant had studied part-time and therefore did not
qualify, overlooking a policy that was directly relevant to the application.
- Judicial Review Cannot Supplement Missing Reasons
The
Minister argued that “academic session” should be interpreted as a
four-month semester rather than York University’s academic year. The Court
rejected this argument because the officer never relied on that interpretation.
Under Vavilov, reviewing courts and government counsel cannot supplement
an administrative decision with reasons that the decision-maker never gave.
- Matter Returned for Reconsideration
Although
the Court found the refusal unreasonable, it declined to order the immediate
issuance of a PGWP. The Court held that the application should instead be
reconsidered by a different officer, while directing that the reassessment
occur within four weeks due to the significant prejudice caused by the delay.
Outcome
The Federal Court granted the application for judicial review, set aside the PGWP refusal, and remitted the application to a different officer for redetermination within four weeks.
Case Citation: Adeniran v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 229 (CanLII)
