Idowu v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 46 : PGWP Refusal Upheld Where Applicant Failed Full-Time Study and Leave Requirements

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal, on reconsideration, of Temitayo Prisca Idowu’s PGWP application. The officer found her ineligible because she had not maintained full-time status during each academic session and had taken leaves exceeding 150 days without proof of authorization. The Court upheld the decision.

Key Principle

PGWP eligibility requirements are mandatory and strictly applied. An applicant who studies part-time outside the permitted final-session exception, or takes extended leave without evidence of authorization or continued compliance with study permit conditions, may be ineligible. The applicant bears the burden of providing all necessary evidence.

Background

The applicant completed a Bachelor of Commerce at MacEwan University. She was part-time in Winter 2017 and did not enroll in three semesters, citing financial hardship affecting her parents. On reconsideration, she argued that her absences qualified as authorized leave and that she remained compliant with her study permit. She maintained that the leaves arose from circumstances beyond her control and were approved. She also challenged the fairness of the process.

Court Findings

• Part-Time Study Independently Made the Applicant Ineligible

The applicant did not dispute that she was part-time during Winter 2017, which was not her final academic session. PGWP eligibility required full-time status during each academic session except the final one. The Court held that this failure alone made her ineligible.

• Financial Hardship Was Not Adequately Established

The applicant said she stopped studying for three semesters because her parents, who funded her education, experienced financial hardship. However, the application contained no meaningful explanation or evidence showing that she or her parents lacked the means to pay tuition. The officer was not required to accept the asserted hardship as establishing an exception.

• Authorized Leave Was Not Proven

The applicant stated that MacEwan University had approved or excused her leaves and provided proof to IRCC. The document relied upon only confirmed completion of her degree. It did not state that the university authorized the extended absences or that she was eligible for a PGWP.

• Study Permit Compliance Was Reasonably Assessed

Because the applicant remained in Canada during leaves exceeding 150 days, she was expected to resume studies within that period, change status, or leave Canada. She relied on an exemption for temporary destitution beyond her control, but there was no supporting evidence. The officer reasonably concluded that she had not complied with her study permit conditions.

• Mandatory PGWP Requirements Could Not Be Waived

The Court emphasized that officers cannot disregard mandatory PGWP eligibility requirements based on sympathetic circumstances. The criteria must be strictly applied. The officer’s brief reasons identified the decisive deficiencies and were sufficiently transparent, intelligible, and justified.

• No Procedural Fairness Breach Occurred

The applicant argued that the officer should have requested additional documents about her absences. The Court rejected this because she already knew from the earlier refusal that continuous full-time study was the central concern and had an opportunity on reconsideration to provide supporting evidence. The officer had no duty to invite her to improve the application.

Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed judicial review, finding the reconsideration decision reasonable and procedurally fair. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Idowu v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 46 (CanLII)