The Federal Court considered
whether a student who temporarily interrupted his studies due to circumstances
beyond his control remained eligible for a Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP).
The Court allowed the judicial review, finding that the officer misinterpreted
the PGWP Program Delivery Instructions (PDIs) and failed to properly consider
the applicant’s specific circumstances. The decision has become a leading
authority on PGWP eligibility where a student experiences a short interruption
in studies.
Key Principle
The Court confirmed that a
student who takes a temporary leave from studies of less than 150 days and
resumes studies within that period is generally considered to be actively
pursuing studies. Officers must apply the PGWP Program Delivery Instructions
correctly and exercise their best judgment by considering all relevant
circumstances explaining the interruption.
Background
Stuart Munyanyi, a citizen
of Zimbabwe, studied at Simon Fraser University and later completed a Bachelor
of Arts degree. During his studies, Zimbabwe experienced severe shortages of
foreign currency, which created difficulties in transferring tuition payments
to Canada. As a result, the applicant was unable to register in time for
certain courses and became a part-time student during one semester. In Fall
2018, the tuition payment delays prevented him from attending any classes for
one academic term.
When he later applied for a
PGWP, the officer refused the application because he had not been enrolled in
classes during Fall 2018, had remained in Canada during that period, and had
not changed his status to visitor status. The officer concluded that he failed
to comply with study permit conditions and was therefore ineligible for a PGWP.
Court Findings
The Federal Court found the
refusal unreasonable. Justice Manson held that the officer incorrectly
interpreted the PGWP Program Delivery Instructions regarding temporary leaves
from studies. The PDIs expressly provide that a student who resumes studies within 150 days of commencing a leave is considered to be actively pursuing
studies during that leave. The requirement to leave Canada or change status
applies only where studies are not resumed within the 150-day period.
The Court noted that the
applicant’s interruption lasted less than 150 days and that he resumed his
studies afterward. Therefore, the officer erred by treating the failure to
leave Canada or change status as a ground of refusal. The Court also emphasized
that Simon Fraser University did not require undergraduate students to obtain
formal authorization before taking a semester off. Consequently, the officer’s
expectation that the applicant should have obtained permission from the
university was not supported by the evidence.
Importantly, the Court
highlighted the PGWP policy instruction directing officers to “exercise
their best judgment and take into account all relevant factors” when
assessing compliance with study permit conditions. The applicant had provided
evidence that the interruption resulted from extraordinary financial
circumstances caused by foreign currency shortages in Zimbabwe and that his
parents possessed the funds necessary to pay tuition. The officer failed to
meaningfully consider this evidence.
The Federal Court granted judicial
review, set aside the PGWP refusal, and returned the matter to a different
officer for reconsideration.
Case Citation:
Munyanyi v. Canada (Citizenship and
Immigration), 2021 FC 802 (CanLII)
