Rasheed v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1503 : Federal Court Sets Aside IRCC’s Reconsideration Decision After Officer Failed to Address the Applicant’s Explanation for a Missing Document

Introduction

The Federal Court reviewed two decisions concerning Amir Rasheed’s Express Entry permanent residence application under the Provincial Nominee Program class. The first decision refused the application because the applicant submitted the wrong World Education Services (WES) document. The applicant conceded that the original refusal was valid. However, the Court granted judicial review of the subsequent reconsideration decision because the officer failed to meaningfully address the applicant’s explanation for the missing document.

Key Principle

The Federal Court reaffirmed that immigration officers have jurisdiction to reconsider decisions. When a reconsideration request is made, the officer must assess whether the evidence justifies reopening the file and must engage with the applicant’s explanation. A reconsideration decision is unreasonable where the officer simply repeats the original reasons for refusal without addressing new information or explanations provided by the applicant.

Background

The applicant applied for permanent residence through Express Entry under the Provincial Nominee Program class. His application was refused on August 29, 2024, because he submitted the incorrect WES document in support of his application.

The applicant later requested reconsideration, explaining the circumstances surrounding the missing required document. He argued that the correct WES document was available and that he was able to provide it on the same day the application was refused.

IRCC refused the reconsideration request on September 4, 2024. The officer stated that the request had been reviewed and that a “thorough re-examination” of the application had taken place.

Court Findings

• Original Refusal Was Not Challenged

The applicant acknowledged before the Court that the original refusal decision contained no reviewable error. The issue before the Court was limited to whether IRCC reasonably handled the reconsideration request.

• Officer Failed to Engage With Applicant’s Explanation

The Court found that the reconsideration decision was unreasonable because the officer did not address the applicant’s explanation for the missing document.

Justice Lafrenière noted that once the officer decided to conduct a reconsideration review, the officer could not simply repeat that the WES report was missing and that the document was required. The officer was required to consider whether the explanation provided a basis for reopening the application.

• Circular Reasoning Was Insufficient

The Court found that the officer’s analysis amounted to circular reasoning. The decision only repeated facts already known from the original refusal rather than explaining why the applicant’s explanation did not justify reconsideration.

The Court emphasized that a reconsideration decision must show engagement with the specific circumstances raised by the applicant.

Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed the judicial review of the original refusal decision. However, the Court granted judicial review of the reconsideration decision, set it aside, and remitted the reconsideration request to a different officer for determination on its merits. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

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