The
Federal Court reviewed a study permit refusal involving an applicant who
applied from within Canada under an exemption allowing temporary residents to
seek a study permit after completing prerequisite studies. The Court found the
refusal unreasonable because the visa officer improperly questioned the
designated learning institution’s decision that the applicant had satisfied the
program’s prerequisite requirements.
Key
Principle
The
decision confirms that visa officers cannot substitute their own assessment
for that of a designated learning institution regarding whether an applicant
has completed the prerequisite studies required for admission. Where a
designated learning institution accepts an applicant and confirms that
prerequisite requirements have been met, officers must not re-evaluate that
academic determination.
Background
Devinder
Singh Virk, an Indian citizen and temporary resident in Canada, was admitted to
the Bachelor of Business Administration program at the University of the Fraser
Valley. The University issued an unconditional letter of acceptance and
confirmed that previously completed courses would be used to satisfy the
program’s prerequisite requirements.
The
visa officer refused the study permit application, stating that the applicant
had not provided proof of completion of prerequisite studies or a conditional
letter of acceptance. The officer concluded that the requirements of subsection
215(1)(f)(iii) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations had not
been met.
Court
Findings
Justice
Harrington found the decision patently unreasonable. The Court noted that the
University’s letter of acceptance was clearly unconditional and that there was
no requirement under the Regulations for a conditional acceptance letter.
More
importantly, the University had expressly determined that the applicant’s prior
studies satisfied the prerequisites for admission. The Court held that this was
a decision for the designated learning institution to make, not the visa
officer. By questioning whether the previously completed courses constituted
acceptable prerequisites, the officer improperly substituted their own judgment
for that of the University.
The
Court emphasized that the applicant had completed studies at the University’s
affiliated campus in India and had also studied in Canada. The University was
satisfied that these studies met the prerequisite requirements for admission.
Once the designated learning institution made that determination, it was not
open to the visa officer to second-guess the academic assessment.
Outcome
The
Federal Court allowed the judicial review, set aside the study permit refusal,
and returned the matter for reconsideration by a different officer.
Case Citation: Virk v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2018 FC 1181 (CanLII)
