Naderiboroujeni v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 684 : Work Permit Refusal Upheld Where Applicant Failed to Prove Relevant Cabinet-Making Experience

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of Naeim Naderiboroujeni’s work permit application for a cabinet-maker position. The officer found that he had not established his ability to perform the work and had not shown that his visit was temporary. The Court found the temporary-intent reasoning inadequate but upheld the refusal because the qualifications finding was reasonable and independently sufficient.

Key Principle

A work permit applicant must provide objective and sufficiently detailed evidence showing the ability to perform the proposed employment. Employment certificates listing only job titles and dates, without duties or independent corroboration, may reasonably be found insufficient. Such a conclusion concerns evidentiary sufficiency rather than credibility and does not ordinarily require an interview or procedural fairness letter.

Background

The applicant claimed cabinet-making employment since 2013. He submitted two employment certificates, a certificate confirming 240 hours of training, and a Canadian job offer. The certificates did not describe his duties, and no wage records, tax documents, bank statements, or other objective proof of employment were submitted.

Court Findings

• Pay Records Were Not Mandatory

The officer did not impose a legal requirement to submit pay slips. Wage records were mentioned only as one example of objective evidence that could have corroborated the applicant’s claimed employment.

• Employment Certificates Lacked Essential Detail

The certificates identified the employers and employment periods but did not explain the cabinet-making duties performed. Without that information, the officer could not determine whether the applicant’s experience matched the requirements of the proposed position.

• Training Did Not Prove Extensive Experience

The 240-hour training certificate established that the applicant had received some cabinet-making instruction. It did not independently prove his claim of nearly ten years of practical employment in the trade.

• Lack of Corroboration Supported the Refusal

The applicant relied on a case holding that pay slips are not always necessary. The Court distinguished it because that applicant had submitted tax returns and bank statements, while no comparable evidence was provided here.

• Temporary-Intent Finding Was Unreasonable

The officer merely stated that the purpose of travel was inconsistent with a temporary stay. The reasons did not connect that conclusion to the permanent job offer, family ties, property, or other evidence, and the Minister could not supply the missing analysis afterward.

• No Credibility or Fairness Error Occurred

The officer did not find that the applicant or his documents were dishonest or fraudulent. The concern was only that the evidence was insufficient, so no oral hearing or additional opportunity to respond was required.

• One Reasonable Ground Sustained the Refusal

The applicant had to satisfy every statutory condition for a work permit. Because the ability-to-perform finding was reasonable and independently determinative, the defective temporary-intent analysis did not justify setting aside the refusal.

Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Naderiboroujeni v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 684 (CanLII)