Igbedion v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 275 : Work Permit Refusal Upheld Where Applicant Lacked Valid Status and LMIA Evidence

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of Roland Weyinmi Igbedion’s work permit application under the temporary COVID-19 public policy for visitors in Canada. The officer found that he lacked valid temporary resident status and had not provided a positive LMIA. The Court held that the refusal was reasonable and procedurally fair.

Key Principle

A work permit applicant relying on a temporary public policy must satisfy its express eligibility conditions. An officer is not required to alert an applicant to deficiencies or invite additional evidence where the application itself fails to establish required status or LMIA support. Public-policy objectives cannot override mandatory eligibility criteria.

Background

The applicant’s International Experience Canada work permit expired on March 14, 2020. He later applied for another work permit, which IRCC refused on July 3, 2020. In December 2020, he applied under the COVID-19 public policy, asserting that his truck-driver position was LMIA-exempt and that he remained in Canada with status.

Court Findings

• No Duty to Warn About Application Deficiencies

The applicant argued that the officer should have alerted him to concerns about restoration and the missing LMIA before refusal. The Court rejected this. Officers are not required to identify deficiencies, request clarification, or offer an interview where an applicant has not established the requirements for a work permit.

• Earlier Work Permit Application Had Been Decided

The applicant claimed his April 14, 2020 application remained outstanding and preserved his status. The Court found IRCC refused that application on July 3, 2020 and sent the decision to counsel. He provided no affidavit from counsel denying receipt and did not challenge the respondent’s sworn evidence that the refusal was sent.

• Valid Visitor Status Was Required

The public policy required valid visitor status on the date of application. The applicant’s prior status expired in March 2020, and his later application had already been refused by July. When he applied under the public policy on December 31, 2020, he therefore lacked valid temporary resident status and failed a core eligibility condition.

• No LMIA Exemption Was Established

The applicant submitted no positive LMIA with the December 2020 application. He asserted that the truck-driver position was LMIA-exempt but identified no applicable exemption code or legal authority. The Court held that this evidentiary gap alone gave the officer a reasonable basis to refuse the application.

• Public-Policy Purpose Did Not Cure Ineligibility

The applicant argued that the policy was intended to assist people unable to leave Canada during the pandemic. The Court held that the policy’s objective did not remove its listed eligibility requirements. Applicants still had to establish valid status and qualifying LMIA-supported or LMIA-exempt employment.

• Two Independent Grounds Supported Refusal

The officer concluded that the applicant lacked both valid status and required LMIA support. The Court found each ground reasonable. Because he failed to establish eligibility under the public policy itself, the refusal was justified and responsive to the governing requirements.

Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed judicial review and upheld the work permit refusal. It found no breach of procedural fairness and no reviewable error in the officer’s eligibility assessment. No question of general importance was certified.

Case Citation:

Igbedion v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 275 (CanLII)