In Masam v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2018 FC 751, the Federal
Court dismissed a judicial review of a Post-Graduation Work Permit refusal. The
applicant completed programs at two Ontario colleges, but her final program was
completed at a private institution that was not eligible for the PGWP program.
Key
Principle
A
school’s DLI designation does not automatically establish PGWP eligibility.
Applicants must independently confirm that both their institution and program
qualify for a PGWP and must apply within the applicable deadline after
completing studies at an eligible institution.
Background
The
applicant completed an Autism and Behavioral Science program at George Brown
College in April 2016 and later completed a Business Administration diploma at
Canadian College for Higher Studies in August 2017. She applied for a PGWP in
October 2017.
The
officer found that Canadian College for Higher Studies was a private,
non-degree-granting institution and could not be considered an eligible
institution for PGWP purposes. Since the applicant applied more than 90 days
after completing her program at George Brown College, she was not eligible.
Applicant’s
Arguments
The
applicant argued that:
- She should have received an opportunity to respond before the refusal;
- The college’s listing as a Designated Learning Institution created a legitimate expectation that she qualified for a PGWP; and
- Prior PGWPs issued to other graduates of the college showed that the refusal was unreasonable.
Court
Findings
The
Court held that an officer was not required to send a procedural fairness
letter because PGWP eligibility was a fundamental requirement that arose
directly from the program criteria. Applicants bear the responsibility to
establish eligibility in their initial application.
The
Court also confirmed that being listed as a Designated Learning Institution
does not automatically make a school or program PGWP-eligible. DLI status is
relevant to study permits, while PGWP eligibility is governed by separate
requirements.
The
doctrine of legitimate expectations could not assist the applicant because it
creates procedural rights only; it cannot create a substantive right to receive
a PGWP. Evidence that other graduates may have received PGWPs was also
insufficient because it did not establish that the college or the applicant’s
specific program was PGWP-eligible.
The
Federal Court dismissed the judicial review and upheld the PGWP refusal.
Case Citation: Masam v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2018 FC 751 (CanLII)
