In Bhardwaj v. Canada
(Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 736, the Federal Court reviewed the
refusal of Temporary Resident Visa (TRV) applications submitted by Jeetender
Bhardwaj and Reena Bhardwaj, Indian citizens seeking to visit their adult
daughter in Calgary, Alberta. The visa officer was not satisfied that the
Applicants would leave Canada at the end of their authorized stay, primarily
because their assets and financial situation were insufficient to support the
proposed visit and the purpose of travel was inconsistent with a temporary
stay. The Court dismissed the judicial review, finding that the officer
reasonably assessed the Applicants’ financial evidence.
Key Principles
Under paragraph 179(b) of the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR), applicants for a TRV
must satisfy the officer that they will leave Canada at the end of their
authorized stay.
The absence of adequate
documentation establishing the availability of funds can, on its own,
justify refusal of a TRV application. An officer is also entitled to examine
the origin, nature, and stability of an applicant’s funds when
determining whether sufficient financial resources have been established.
Applicants bear the
responsibility of providing adequate documentary evidence to support their
financial circumstances. Merely demonstrating a bank balance or claiming
ownership of assets is not necessarily sufficient where the source and
availability of those funds remain unexplained.
Background
The Applicants, Jeetender and
Reena Bhardwaj, were citizens of India who applied for TRVs in May 2023 to
visit their adult daughter in Calgary from August 5 to August 25, 2023. Their
applications were refused on May 30, 2023.
The officer was not satisfied
that the Applicants would leave Canada at the end of their stay. The refusal
was based on concerns that their assets and financial situation were
insufficient to support their proposed travel and that the purpose of their visit
was not consistent with a temporary stay.
Court Findings
➢ Financial Documentation
The Court found the officer’s
decision reasonable because the Applicants provided minimal documentation
demonstrating that they had sufficient and available funds for their proposed
trip. They provided a balance confirmation certificate dated April 5,
2023, but did not provide a detailed transaction history or documentation
establishing the source of the funds.
The Court noted that the
Applicants had also claimed to possess assets including bank funds, stocks,
jewellery, and other immovable assets. However, they failed to adequately
address the officer’s concern regarding the source and availability of
those funds.
➢ Bank Transaction History
The Court emphasized that the
Applicants did not comply with the TRV application instructions applicable to
visitors from India, which required a detailed history of at least six months
of their bank account. The absence of transaction records prevented the officer
from properly assessing the origin and stability of the claimed funds.
➢ Burden on Applicants
The Applicants did not provide
personal affidavit evidence and failed to demonstrate that their claimed
financial resources were genuinely available to fund the trip. Given the
evidentiary deficiencies, the Court found it reasonable for the officer to conclude
that the Applicants had not established sufficient funds for their stay.
Outcome
The Federal Court dismissed
the application for judicial review, finding that the Applicants had failed
to demonstrate that the officer’s decision was unreasonable in light of the
evidence before the officer. No question was certified.
Case
Citation:
Bhardwaj v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 736 (CanLII)
Prepared by:
Dr. Muhammad
Abrar (Barrister and
Solicitor)
Author | Writer | Mentor | Legal Researcher | Canadian
Immigration Case Law and Statistics Analyst
