Adiele v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1256 : Judicial Review Granted After Officer Ignored Evidence of Spouse’s Full-Time Student Status

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of Paul Uchemadu Adiele’s open work permit application, which he sought to accompany his wife studying at the University of Saskatchewan. The Officer initially refused the application on February 2, 2024, citing insufficient evidence that the spouse was a full-time student at a Designated Learning Institution (DLI). The Court granted judicial review, finding that the Officer’s decision did not adequately engage with the evidence before them, rendering it unreasonable.

Key Principle

Under subsection 72(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), judicial review examines whether a decision is reasonable, reflecting justification, transparency, and intelligibility (Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65). Procedural fairness arguments are considered on a correctness standard.

Background

Mr. Adiele’s work permit application was refused on the basis that his spouse’s student status was unverified. He requested reconsideration, but IRCC’s correspondence failed to resolve the matter, leading him to file for leave and judicial review. On October 21, 2024, IRCC acknowledged sufficient evidence of the spouse’s student status but maintained refusal based on financial insufficiency.

The Certified Tribunal Record (CTR) did not include materials regarding the reconsideration request, but the Court accepted the evidence submitted in the Applicant’s affidavit.

Court Findings

• Reasonableness of Decision

The Court found that the Officer failed to consider the evidence provided regarding the spouse’s status as a full-time student. The refusal letter and notes did not demonstrate that the Officer engaged with this central issue or explained why the evidence was insufficient. This omission rendered the February 2, 2024 decision unreasonable.

• Mootness Not Applicable

The Respondent argued the matter was moot due to the October 21, 2024 reconsideration. The Court disagreed, noting a live controversy persisted over the initial refusal and that discretion allowed hearing the application despite the subsequent reconsideration.

• Procedural Fairness

The Court did not address procedural fairness because the focus was on reasonableness, and the argument was not properly raised for judicial review.

Outcome

The Court granted judicial review, set aside the February 2, 2024 decision, and remitted the application to a different officer for redetermination. No question of general importance was certified.

Case Citation:

Adiele v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1256 (CanLII)