Farboodi Langaroodi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2023 FC 1280 : Work Permit Refusal Upheld Where Language Evidence Was Insufficient for Proposed Employment

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of Maryam Farboodi Langaroodi’s LMIA-based work permit for employment as a Residential Home Builder and her spouse’s dependent open work permit. The officer found that her demonstrated English ability was insufficient for the proposed employment. The Court upheld the decision as reasonable.

Key Principle

A work permit applicant bears the burden of providing sufficient evidence that they can perform the proposed employment. Where communication is important to the position and the only language evidence consists of relatively low IELTS scores, an officer may reasonably conclude that the applicant has not demonstrated adequate language ability, provided the reasoning is sufficiently connected to the job requirements and evidence.

Background

The principal applicant had seven years of experience as a Home Design and Renovation Manager. She obtained an employment offer as a Residential Home Builder involving scheduling work, selecting and employing subcontractors, and managing budgets. Her employer obtained a positive LMIA.

The applicant submitted IELTS results showing an overall score of 5 and a reading score of 3.5. The officer considered language ability critical to the proposed position and refused the application. Her spouse’s open work permit was refused consequentially.

Court Findings

• Applicant Bore the Burden of Proving Language Ability

The Court emphasized that work permit applicants must put forward their best case and provide all documentation required to demonstrate eligibility. The only evidence of the applicant’s English ability was her IELTS result.

• IELTS Scores Reasonably Supported the Officer’s Concern

An overall IELTS score of 5 was evidence of basic rather than effective communication skills. Given the nature of the Residential Home Builder position and the absence of other evidence demonstrating stronger language ability, the officer reasonably found the evidence insufficient.

• No Improper Language Threshold Was Imposed

The Court rejected the argument that the officer had imposed an unexplained or excessively high language standard. Rather, the officer assessed the language evidence actually submitted against the requirements of the proposed employment.

• Reasons Were Sufficient in Context

Although detailed language analysis may sometimes be required, reasons are not assessed against a standard of perfection. Given the limited evidence submitted, the officer sufficiently explained why the applicant had not demonstrated adequate English ability for the position.

• Other Positive Factors Did Not Require Reweighing

The applicants argued that family ties, assets, and travel history were overlooked. The Court found no evidence these factors were ignored and held that judicial review could not be used to reweigh them, particularly because the refusal was grounded principally in language ability.

Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed the judicial review application and upheld both work permit refusals. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Farboodi Langaroodi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2023 FC 1280 (CanLII)