Munyanyi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 802 : Federal Court Finds PGWP Refusal Unreasonable After Officer Misapplied 150-Day Study Leave Rule

The Federal Court reviewed IRCC’s refusal of Stuart Simbarashe Munyanyi’s Post-Graduation Work Permit application. The officer found that he was ineligible because he had not maintained full-time studies, remained in Canada during a semester in which he was not enrolled, and did not change his status to visitor. The Court granted judicial review, finding that the officer incorrectly applied the PGWP instructions governing study leaves of less than 150 days and failed to properly consider the applicant’s circumstances.

Key Principle

The Federal Court reaffirmed that PGWP eligibility requirements must generally be applied strictly and officers cannot waive mandatory criteria. However, when assessing compliance during a period of leave, officers must correctly interpret the applicable instructions, exercise their best judgment, and consider all relevant circumstances. Requirements that apply only after 150 days cannot be imposed on shorter leaves.

Background

The applicant, a citizen of Zimbabwe, arrived in Canada in 2012 and completed a Bachelor of Arts at Simon Fraser University in September 2020.

During spring 2017, he studied part-time after a foreign currency shortage in Zimbabwe delayed tuition payment and prevented timely registration in a mandatory course. In fall 2018, another currency shortage delayed payment despite his parents having sufficient funds, resulting in him taking the semester off.

IRCC refused his PGWP application. The officer noted that he had not attended classes during fall 2018, remained in Canada on a study permit, and had neither left Canada nor changed his status to visitor. The officer was not satisfied that his explanation made him eligible for a PGWP.

Court Findings

• Leaving Canada or Changing Status Was Not Required

The Court found that the applicant’s fall 2018 absence from studies lasted less than 150 days. Under the PGWP instructions, students are required to change status or leave Canada only if they do not resume studies within 150 days. The officer therefore relied on requirements that did not apply to his situation.

• SFU Did Not Require Formal Permission for a Term Off

The Respondent argued that the applicant had failed to obtain authorization from SFU for his leave. However, SFU’s policy stated that undergraduate students did not need to request the university’s permission to take a term off. The Court found that this undermined the argument that the applicant had breached a formal leave-authorization requirement.

• Officer Failed to Properly Assess the Exceptional Circumstances

The applicant explained that a shortage of foreign currency in Zimbabwe prevented timely tuition payment. He also provided evidence that Standard Chartered Bank informed SFU about the shortage and confirmed that his parents had funds available, but SFU did not approve the proposed payment arrangement. Although officers cannot waive PGWP eligibility requirements, the instructions directed them to use their best judgment and consider all relevant factors when assessing compliance. The Court found that the officer’s analysis did not reasonably account for these circumstances.

Outcome

The Federal Court granted judicial review and returned the PGWP application to a different officer for reconsideration. The refusal was unreasonable because the officer misapplied the study-leave requirements and failed to properly assess the applicant’s evidence and circumstances. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Munyanyi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 802 (CanLII)