Peiro v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 1146 : Study Permit Refusal Set Aside Where Family Ties and Economic Motives Were Unsupported, Despite Valid Concern About Prior Non-Compliance

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of a study permit application from an Iranian student who had previously studied in Canada and had been issued an exclusion order after failing to remain enrolled and actively pursue his studies.

The officer relied on three principal concerns: family ties in Canada, economic motives to remain in Canada, and the applicant’s previous breach of study permit conditions.

The Court accepted that the officer could reasonably rely on the applicant’s prior immigration non-compliance. However, the other two grounds were unsupported by the evidence, making the overall refusal unreasonable.

Key Principle

A prior breach of temporary resident conditions is a legitimate factor when assessing whether an applicant is likely to comply with a future study permit.

However, an otherwise valid concern does not automatically save a refusal where other material reasons are speculative or unsupported by the record.

Where an officer relies on family ties or economic incentives to remain in Canada, the reasons must identify the factual basis connecting those circumstances to a genuine concern that the applicant will not leave Canada when required.

Background

The applicant first came to Canada in 2012 and later completed an Associate of Arts degree. He was subsequently admitted to UBC as a third-year student.

After failing three courses, he stopped studying during the Winter 2016 semester. UBC placed him on academic probation and required him to remain out of studies for at least 12 months.

Because he remained in Canada on a study permit while no longer actively studying, CBSA commenced enforcement proceedings. An exclusion order was issued in March 2017, and the applicant left Canada the following month.

After the exclusion period expired, he was readmitted to UBC and applied again for a study permit.

Court Findings

The Court found the officer’s treatment of family ties unreasonable.

The applicant’s only family member in Canada was his younger brother, who was himself an international student and therefore only temporarily present in Canada. Meanwhile, the applicant’s parents remained in Iran, where the family business was also located.

The officer did not explain how the temporary presence of one sibling in Canada outweighed those substantial ties to Iran.

The finding regarding economic motives was similarly unsupported.

The officer stated that economic incentives might cause the applicant to remain in Canada but did not identify what those incentives were. The applicant had only briefly worked in Canada several years earlier and had expressly indicated an intention to return to Iran to assist with his father’s business.

The Court characterized the economic-motive concern as speculative and lacking a factual foundation.

The Court reached a different conclusion concerning the applicant’s previous immigration history.

The applicant had remained in Canada for approximately 14 months while not enrolled at UBC, contrary to the conditions attached to his study permit. The officer was therefore reasonably entitled to consider that history when assessing whether he would comply with a future permit.

The Court declined to reweigh that aspect of the decision.

Nevertheless, because two of the three principal grounds supporting the refusal were unreasonable, the decision as a whole could not stand.

Outcome

The Federal Court allowed the application for judicial review and remitted the study permit application to a different officer for reconsideration.

Case Citation:

Peiro v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 1146 CanLII