Nguyen v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1894 : IRCC Must Disclose the Facts Underlying a Misrepresentation Concern Before Refusing an application

Introduction

The Federal Court reviewed IRCC’s refusal of a work permit application under the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, based on a finding of inadmissibility for misrepresentation. The applicant, Thi Huyen Trang Nguyen, argued that she was denied procedural fairness because the procedural fairness letter (PFL) did not disclose sufficient details regarding the officer’s concerns about the authenticity of her employment documentation. The Court agreed, finding that the PFL failed to provide the applicant with a meaningful opportunity to know the case she had to meet and respond to.

Key Principle

The Federal Court reaffirmed that findings of misrepresentation attract a heightened duty of procedural fairness due to the severe consequences, including a five-year inadmissibility period. Officers must disclose the underlying facts giving rise to concerns rather than merely stating a conclusion. Applicants must be provided a meaningful chance to respond to those concerns.

Background

The applicant, a citizen of Vietnam, applied for a work permit based on a positive Labour Market Impact Assessment and declared employment as a cook at Buffalo Rice 179 Restaurant. She provided her resume, employment contract, and an employer letter confirming her employment.

During verification, the RAU officer identified signs of potential alterations in the employer letter, noted the lack of a company seal, absence of open-source information about the employer, and unsuccessful attempts to contact the employer. A procedural fairness letter was issued expressing concerns that the employment document may be fraudulent and warning of the consequences under IRPA.

The applicant responded, confirming the letter’s authenticity, providing additional documentation including the employer’s bank statement and photographs, but was refused on August 23, 2024. The officer gave little weight to the evidence submitted, citing discrepancies and credibility concerns.

Court Findings

• PFL Did Not Adequately Disclose the Facts

The Court held that the PFL only stated that the employer letter was allegedly fraudulent without explaining the underlying factual concerns, such as suspected photoshopping of dates or periods of employment. This prevented the applicant from addressing the specific issues.

• Applicant Denied Meaningful Opportunity to Respond

The Court concluded that the applicant was unaware of the exact nature of the officer’s concerns and therefore could not fully respond. Disclosure of the facts underlying the concern is necessary for procedural fairness in misrepresentation cases .

• Extrinsic Investigations Not Required to Be Disclosed

The Court clarified that officers need not disclose investigations or materials that were not relied upon in forming the PFL. The duty of disclosure relates only to the facts forming the concern in the PFL itself .

Outcome

The Federal Court granted the application for judicial review, set aside the work permit refusal, and remitted the matter to a different decision-maker for redetermination. The procedural fairness breach was sufficient to require this outcome. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Nguyen v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1894 (CanLII)