Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1478 : Court Rejects PGWP Appeal After Student Failed to Meet Final Semester Exception Requirements

The Federal Court reviewed IRCC’s refusal of Simranpreet Kaur’s Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP) application. The applicant completed two one-year certificate programs at Bow Valley College but was refused a PGWP because the officer found that she did not maintain full-time student status during her final academic session. The Court dismissed the judicial review, finding that the officer reasonably concluded the applicant’s part-time semester was not her final semester for PGWP eligibility purposes.

Key Principle

The Federal Court reaffirmed that PGWP applicants bear the burden of demonstrating that they meet all eligibility requirements. To qualify, applicants must generally maintain full-time student status during each semester of their program, except during a regularly scheduled break or the final semester. Courts will defer to reasonable interpretations by immigration officers where the decision is supported by the record.

Background

The applicant, a citizen of India, completed the second of two one-year certificate programs at Bow Valley College and applied for a Post-Graduation Work Permit.

During the fall 2023 semester of her second certificate program, the applicant enrolled in only one three-credit course, resulting in part-time status. She explained that she was repeating the course to improve her grade point average and qualify for a required field placement in the following winter semester.

IRCC refused the PGWP application, finding that the fall 2023 semester was not the applicant’s final semester or final academic session because she still had the winter 2024 field placement remaining. Since she had studied part-time outside an accepted exception period, the officer concluded that she did not meet the PGWP requirements.

Court Findings

• Fall Semester Was Not the Final Semester

The Court agreed with IRCC that the applicant’s final academic session was not the fall 2023 semester. The remaining winter 2024 field placement was a required component of the program and was necessary for completion.

Justice Fuhrer noted that the transcript showed the field placement was assigned a course code, course title, and academic credits. Although the applicant characterized it as a practicum or co-op term rather than academic study, the record did not support that distinction.

• Officer’s Reasons Were Sufficient

The Court held that the brevity of the officer’s reasons did not make the decision unreasonable. The GCMS notes clearly explained that the applicant had been part-time during a semester that was not considered a final semester.

The Court emphasized that administrative decisions do not require perfect reasons. The question is whether the reasoning is understandable and supported by the evidence.

• Alternative Interpretations Did Not Make Decision Unreasonable

The Court accepted that a different interpretation of the program structure may have been possible. However, the existence of another reasonable interpretation does not mean the officer’s decision was unreasonable.

Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review. The Court found that the officer reasonably determined the applicant was not eligible for a PGWP because she did not maintain full-time student status as required. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1478 (CanLII)