Noori v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 773 : Spousal Open Work Permit Refusal Upheld Where Applicants Failed to Demonstrate Adequate Financial Support

The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review challenging the refusal of a Spousal Open Work Permit (SOWP) and accompanying Temporary Resident Visa (TRV) applications for three minor children. The Court held that the visa officer reasonably concluded that the family’s financial circumstances were insufficient to support a family of five during the proposed temporary stay in Canada and that the applicants had not established they would leave Canada at the end of their authorized stay. The decision confirms that officers may assess an applicant’s overall financial capacity and temporary intent by considering both income and assets, while giving appropriate weight to the Low-Income Cut-Off (LICO) as an objective reference point.

Key Principle

A visa officer may reasonably refuse temporary resident applications where the evidence does not establish that the applicants possess sufficient financial resources to support the purpose of their proposed stay or where concerns remain regarding temporary intent. Officers are entitled to consider an applicant’s income, assets, family composition, and overall financial circumstances, including the Low-Income Cut-Off (LICO), as objective factors when assessing whether a temporary stay is sustainable. Applicants bear the burden of presenting a complete application, and disagreement with the officer’s weighing of the evidence does not render a decision unreasonable.

Background

The principal applicant, a citizen of Iran, applied for a Spousal Open Work Permit to join her husband in Canada, who was employed in British Columbia under a valid work permit. She also submitted Temporary Resident Visa applications for their three minor children so the family could reunite in Canada.

In support of the applications, the family provided evidence of the husband’s employment income, the principal applicant’s Canadian-dollar savings exceeding $39,000, proof of real estate ownership in Iran, evidence of family ties remaining in Iran, travel history, and a psychologist’s letter explaining the children’s need for family reunification.

The visa officer nevertheless refused all applications, finding that the family’s financial circumstances were insufficient to support a family of five during the proposed stay, that the applicants had significant family ties in Canada, and that they had not demonstrated sufficient motivation to leave Canada upon the expiry of their temporary status.

Court Findings

·         The Officer Reasonably Assessed the Family’s Financial Capacity

Justice Blackhawk held that the officer reasonably evaluated the applicants’ overall financial circumstances. Although the applicants argued that the officer focused only on the husband’s income, the GCMS notes referred to both the husband’s earnings and “their assets,” demonstrating that the officer considered the family’s savings and property holdings before concluding that the available resources were insufficient to support a family of five for approximately two and a half years in Canada.

·         Reference to the Low-Income Cut-Off Was Permissible

The Court accepted that the officer’s reference to the Low-Income Cut-Off (LICO) was not the creation of a new legal requirement but merely an objective benchmark used to assess whether the family’s proposed stay was financially sustainable. The officer remained focused on the overall statutory assessment rather than imposing an additional eligibility criterion.

·         No Procedural Fairness Obligation Arose

The Court also rejected the applicants’ procedural fairness arguments. The officer made no credibility findings, relied only on the evidence submitted, and was not required to invite further submissions simply because concerns arose regarding financial sufficiency and temporary intent. Applicants are expected to put their best case forward when submitting their applications.

Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review, concluding that the refusals of the Spousal Open Work Permit and Temporary Resident Visa applications were reasonable. The decision confirms that officers may rely on an applicant’s overall financial circumstances, including income, assets, and objective financial benchmarks such as LICO, when assessing temporary resident applications, and that applicants bear the burden of establishing both financial sufficiency and genuine temporary intent.

Case Citation:

Noori v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 773 (CanLII)