Rasheed v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1503 : Express Entry Reconsideration Set Aside Where Officer Failed to Engage With Explanation for Missing WES Document

The Federal Court considered two judicial review applications arising from back-to-back decisions concerning the Applicant’s Express Entry permanent residence application under the Provincial Nominee Program. The Applicant conceded that the original refusal was not erroneous because he had submitted the wrong World Education Services (WES) document. However, the Court found the subsequent reconsideration decision unreasonable because the Officer undertook a “thorough re-examination” but failed to meaningfully address the Applicant’s explanation for the omission or the fact that the correct document was produced on the day of refusal.

Key Principle

A reconsideration request involves a two-step process: the officer must first determine whether there is sufficient evidence to reopen the file and, if it is reopened, consider whether the original decision should be rescinded. Once an officer undertakes a substantive re-examination of the application, the officer cannot simply disregard the applicant’s explanation and repeat the reasons underlying the original refusal.

Background

The Applicant applied for permanent residence through Express Entry under the PNP Class. On August 29, 2024, the Officer refused the application because the Applicant had submitted the wrong WES document rather than the required WES report. At judicial review, the Applicant conceded that there was no reviewable error in this original refusal.

The Applicant subsequently requested reconsideration. He explained why the required document had been omitted and pointed out that he had been able to produce the correct WES document on the same day the application was refused. The Officer’s September 4, 2024 decision stated that the request had been reviewed and that a “thorough re-examination” of the application had taken place, but nevertheless refused reconsideration.

Court Findings

• Reconsideration jurisdiction: The Court confirmed that an immigration officer has jurisdiction to reconsider a decision. The process involves determining whether there is sufficient evidence to reopen the file and, if so, whether the original decision should be rescinded and replaced with a favourable decision.

• Officer could have refused to reopen: The Court recognized that the Officer could have declined to reopen the application on the basis that there had been no error in the original processing. However, the Officer did not simply refuse to reopen the file. Instead, the Officer stated that a “thorough re-examination” had taken place.

• Failure to engage with explanation: Having undertaken the re-examination, the Officer was required to engage with the Applicant’s explanation. Instead, the reasons merely repeated that the required WES report had not been included, that the wrong WES report had been submitted, and that the correct report was required. The reasons did not address the explanation or the fact that the correct document had been produced on the day of refusal.

• Circular reasoning: The Court characterized the Officer’s purported “thorough” analysis as essentially circular reasoning because it repeated the original deficiency without addressing the new information relied upon in the reconsideration request.

Outcome

The Court dismissed the judicial review application challenging the original refusal but granted judicial review of the reconsideration decision. The reconsideration decision was set aside and the request was remitted to a different officer for reconsideration on its merits. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Rasheed v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1503 (CanLII)