Lee v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 913 : Study Permit Refusal Set Aside Due to Ignored Extension Request

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of Aeri Lee’s study permit extension application. IRCC had requested updated enrolment confirmation and transcripts within ten days. The applicant submitted some documents and requested a 30-day extension to obtain the remaining transcripts. The officer refused the application for non-compliance without addressing the extension request. The Court found that this breached procedural fairness and that the later reconsideration decision did not cure the defect.

Key Principle

When an applicant requests a reasonable extension to respond to a document request, the officer must consider and decide that request before refusing the application for non-compliance. A procedural fairness breach may be cured through reconsideration only if the reconsideration process genuinely addresses the original defect. The officer must assess the extension request based on the circumstances existing when it was made, rather than faulting the applicant months later for not obtaining documents after the application had already been refused.

Background

The applicant had studied in Canada under previous study permits and later applied for an extension to attend St. Michael’s College at the University of Toronto.

On December 2, 2022, IRCC requested a current enrolment letter and transcripts for all post-secondary studies in Canada by December 12, 2022.

The applicant requested an extension until January 12, 2023, explaining that she required more time to obtain transcripts from three institutions. She submitted one official transcript and documents concerning a study gap related to mental health difficulties.

IRCC refused the application on December 19, 2022, stating that she had not complied with the document request but making no reference to her extension request.

Court Findings

• Extension Request Was Ignored

The officer did not acknowledge or determine the applicant’s request for additional time before refusing the application.

• Procedural Fairness Was Breached

Refusing for non-compliance without addressing a pending extension request denied the applicant a fair opportunity to provide the requested documents.

• Reconsideration Did Not Cure the Breach

Although the officer later acknowledged the extension request, the officer still did not assess whether it should have been granted when originally submitted.

• Applicant Could Not Be Faulted for Later Inaction

Once the application had been refused, it was unreasonable to expect the applicant to spend additional time and money obtaining official transcripts without knowing whether the file would be reopened.

• Original Circumstances Required Assessment

The officer should have considered whether the requested 30-day extension was reasonable based on the circumstances existing in December 2022.

Outcome

The Federal Court granted judicial review, set aside the study permit refusal, and returned the application to a different officer for redetermination. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Lee v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 913 (CanLII)