Agbato v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 691 : Provincial Nominee PR Misrepresentation Finding Set Aside Where Officer Relied on Deficient Employment Verification

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of Olubunmi Oluwatosin Agbato’s PR application under a Provincial Nominee Program and the accompanying five-year misrepresentation finding. IRCC agents conducted site visits to two addresses connected to her former employer and concluded that the company did not operate at either location. The Court granted judicial review because the officer relied on unreliable information from individuals unfamiliar with the premises, misunderstood the relocation evidence, and mischaracterized documents submitted in response to the procedural fairness letter.

Key Principle

Employment verification may support a misrepresentation finding, but the verification process and resulting evidence must be reliable. An officer cannot reasonably rely on statements from individuals who plainly lack knowledge of the businesses operating at a location, misstate the applicant’s explanation about a staff relocation, or incorrectly characterize corporate documents. Given the serious five-year consequence of misrepresentation, the reasons must reflect the evidentiary weaknesses and the significant stakes for the applicant.

Background

The applicant relied on several years of employment as a sales manager with a distribution company.

She explained that the company operated from a main office and an annex office and had temporarily moved staff while the main office was being renovated.

During a site visit, IRCC agents found no company signage and spoke with individuals who said they did not know the company. At the annex office, an individual stated that no one had moved into the premises recently.

The applicant responded to a procedural fairness letter with an updated address, photographs, transaction records, annual-return filing acknowledgements, and a letter and business card from the company’s CEO.

Court Findings

• No Procedural Fairness Breach Occurred
The Court held that IRCC fulfilled its duty of procedural fairness by clearly disclosing its concerns in the procedural fairness letter and giving the applicant an opportunity to respond. The officer was not required to seek further evidence or conduct another site visit before making the decision.

• Main Office Verification Was Unreliable
The Court found that the officer relied on information from individuals who lacked knowledge of the businesses operating at the main office, including a clerk who provided the wrong address and a receptionist who could not identify her own employer. This significantly undermined the reliability of the employment verification process.

• Relocation Evidence Was Misunderstood
The applicant explained that employees had temporarily relocated to an existing annex office during renovations, not that the company had recently established a new office. The Court held that the officer misinterpreted this explanation, leading to an unreasonable assessment of the evidence.

• Corporate Documents Were Mischaracterized
The officer incorrectly treated the applicant’s annual-return acknowledgements as confidential tax documents. The Court noted that these were simply corporate filing acknowledgements and that misunderstanding their nature further weakened the officer’s reasoning.

• Errors Were Cumulatively Serious
The Court held that the unreliable site verification, misunderstanding of the applicant’s explanation, and mischaracterization of the documentary evidence collectively broke the rational chain of analysis. Given the serious consequence of a five-year inadmissibility finding, these errors rendered the decision unreasonable.

Outcome

The Federal Court granted judicial review and set aside the PR refusal and misrepresentation finding. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Agbato v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 691 (CanLII)