Cervjakova v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2018 FC 1052 : Federal Court Reviews Study Permit Refusal Where Officer’s Concerns About Temporary Intent and Finances Were Unsupported by Evidence

Tatiana Cervjakova sought judicial review after her study permit application was refused because the visa officer was not satisfied that she would leave Canada at the end of her authorized stay or that she had sufficient financial resources for her studies. The Federal Court found both conclusions unreasonable. The evidence supported her bona fide study plans, ability to finance her education and family, and compliance with Canadian immigration requirements.

Key Principle

Although study permit applicants bear the burden of demonstrating temporary intent and sufficient financial resources, an officer’s conclusions must remain reasonably connected to the evidence. A lawful decision to apply for studies after entering Canada as a visitor does not itself undermine bona fides, and the financial sacrifices associated with studying abroad do not establish an unreasonable study plan where the evidence demonstrates that the applicant can afford those sacrifices.

Background

Cervjakova, her husband and their two young children entered Canada from Latvia as visitors in July 2017. After arriving, she investigated Canadian educational opportunities and obtained conditional admission to Seneca College for a four-year International Accounting and Finance program, subject to completing one year of English-language studies.

She applied for a study permit in October 2017 while lawfully present in Canada. She explained that she intended to return to Latvia after completing her studies and continue working in accounting, a field in which she already had several years of experience. Her parents and her husband’s parents remained in Latvia, and she had no family in Canada apart from her husband and children.

The officer nevertheless questioned her purpose of study, family ties, proposed length of stay, employment situation, finances and access to similar programs in Latvia.

Court Findings

• Temporary Intent Finding Lacked a Reasonable Basis

The Court emphasized that Cervjakova had complied with Canadian immigration law. She entered with a visitor visa and applied for a study permit when she subsequently decided to pursue further education. The officer questioned why she had not applied before leaving Latvia, but she was not legally required to do so. Her application could properly be processed through a visa office outside Canada while she remained lawfully in Canada.

• Financial Concern Was Unsupported by the Record

The Court found that Cervjakova had presented evidence demonstrating adequate resources to support herself and her family. The applicable policy emphasized funding for the first year, followed by a probability of future funding. Although her husband had left employment in Latvia and his ability to obtain Canadian employment was uncertain, the family’s plans did not depend upon him finding work. The evidence demonstrated that they could afford the financial sacrifices associated with her studies.

• Unusual Study Decision Did Not Establish Bad Faith

The Court acknowledged that converting a summer visit into a five-year educational commitment might appear unusual. However, unusual circumstances were not evidence of improper motivation. Nothing reasonably supported the conclusion that Cervjakova did not genuinely intend to study, could not afford the program, or would fail to leave Canada when required.

Outcome

The Federal Court granted judicial review, set aside the January 4, 2018 study permit refusal and remitted the application to another visa officer for reconsideration. No question of general importance was certified.

Case Citation:

Cervjakova v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2018 FC 1052 (CanLII)