Khanam v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 883 : Federal Court Confirms Application Submission Time—Not Payment Date—Determines Eligibility Under Changed Spousal Open Work Permit Rules

The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review challenging the refusal of a Spousal Open Work Permit (SOWP) following changes to Canada’s eligibility requirements for spouses of foreign workers. The applicant argued that because she paid her application fees before the policy change took effect, her application should have been assessed under the previous rules. The Court rejected this argument, holding that the relevant consideration was the date and time the application was received by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), not when the application fees were paid. As the application was submitted after the prescribed deadline, the officer reasonably applied the new eligibility criteria.

Key Principle

Where immigration policies establish a specific filing deadline, eligibility is determined by the date and time the application is received by IRCC rather than the date payment is made. Payment of processing fees does not constitute submission of an application, and applicants bear the responsibility of ensuring that complete online applications are filed before the applicable deadline.

Background

The applicant, a citizen of Bangladesh, applied for a Spousal Open Work Permit based on her husband’s employment in Canada.

Effective January 21, 2025, at 5:00 UTC, IRCC introduced new eligibility requirements restricting which foreign workers could sponsor their spouses for open work permits. Under the revised policy, the applicant’s husband, employed as a Food Services Supervisor, no longer qualified to sponsor her application.

The applicant maintained that her application should nevertheless be assessed under the previous rules because she paid the required government fees before the implementation deadline. During the judicial review hearing, she sought to rely on an official payment receipt showing payment had been made on January 20, 2025.

Court Findings

·         Filing Date Determines Which Policy Applies

Justice McDonald held that the decisive issue was not when payment was made, but when IRCC actually received the complete application. While the payment receipt established that the fees had been paid before the policy change, it did not establish that the application itself had been submitted before the deadline. The Court found that the GCMS notes constituted the only reliable evidence of the filing time and confirmed that the application was received after the deadline.

·         The New Evidence Did Not Change the Outcome

The Court admitted the payment receipt because it related to the applicant’s procedural fairness argument. However, the evidence carried little weight since it merely proved that payment had been processed. It did not demonstrate that the online application had been filed before the January 21, 2025 cut-off established by IRCC.

·         IRCC’s Published Deadlines Were Clear

The Court also relied on IRCC’s published guidance explaining that online applications are processed according to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) and that applicants are responsible for accounting for the difference between local time and UTC. Since the application was not received before the published deadline, the officer correctly applied the new eligibility requirements.

Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review, concluding that the officer reasonably determined the application had been submitted after the policy change came into force. The decision reinforces that, where immigration policies impose filing deadlines, it is the actual submission of the complete application, rather than payment of processing fees, that determines which legislative or policy framework applies.

Case Citation:

Khanam v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 883 (CanLII)