Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 513 : Decision Set Aside After IRCC Used Graduation Date Instead of Date Students Received Written Confirmation for PGWP Deadline

Sandeep Kaur and Jaspreet Kaur sought judicial review of IRCC decisions refusing their Post-Graduation Work Permit applications and restoration applications. IRCC concluded that their applications were filed outside the then-applicable 90-day PGWP deadline because their diplomas showed an August 17, 2018 graduation date. The Federal Court found that IRCC unreasonably assumed the applicants received their diplomas on that date, despite evidence that written confirmation was received later.

Key Principle

The PGWP application deadline runs from the date an applicant receives written confirmation from the educational institution that program requirements have been completed, not simply from the graduation date or the date the applicant knows they graduated. Where IRCC relies on a diploma date as the date of notification, there must be a reasonable evidentiary basis to conclude that the diploma was actually received on that date.

Background

The applicants entered Canada from India in December 2016 and completed two-year programs at Lambton College. They graduated on August 17, 2018. Lambton issued their transcripts on October 2 and 3, 2018, confirming that they had graduated, and both applicants filed PGWP applications on October 6.

IRCC refused those applications in December 2018, stating that required documentation concerning completion of studies had not been submitted. The applicants promptly obtained Registrar letters, submitted their diplomas and transcripts again, and applied for restoration and PGWPs on December 26.

Their restoration applications were later refused for allegedly unpaid fees, although the fees had actually been paid. On reconsideration, IRCC acknowledged the payment but refused again because it treated August 17 as the date the applicants received their diplomas and therefore considered December 26 outside the 90-day window.

Court Findings

• Graduation Date Was Not Proof of Receipt

The diplomas stated that the college’s seal and signatures were affixed on August 17, but did not establish when the applicants received them. The officer therefore had to infer that receipt occurred on the graduation date. On the record, that inference was unreasonable.

• Other Evidence Pointed to October Notification

The transcripts were not issued until early October, and the college’s confirmation letters came later. There was also no evidence of a graduation ceremony on August 17 at which diplomas were distributed. Significantly, the applicants filed their original PGWP applications within days of receiving the October transcripts but did not include diplomas. These circumstances undermined IRCC’s assumption that the diplomas had already been received in August.

• PGWP Instructions Focused on Written Confirmation

The Court emphasized that the applicable Program Delivery Instructions measured the 90 days from receipt of written confirmation, such as an official letter or transcript. The deadline did not begin merely because the students graduated or knew they had graduated.

The Court also observed that the October transcripts themselves stated “GRADUATED (August 2018).” The applicable instructions expressly contemplated a transcript as sufficient written confirmation. The original refusals for lacking additional completion documentation therefore appeared inconsistent with the PGWP instructions, although the Court did not need to finally decide that issue.

Outcome

The Court granted both judicial review applications, quashed IRCC’s decisions, and returned the matters for redetermination by a different officer. No certified question arose.

Case Citation:

Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 513 (CanLII)