Sungai v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 825 : Spousal Open Work Permit Refusal Set Aside After Officer Relied on Updated Student Compliance Information Without Giving the Applicant an Opportunity to Respond

The Federal Court reviewed IRCC’s refusal of Munashe Sungai’s open work permit application. The applicant, a citizen of Zimbabwe living in Canada as a temporary resident, applied to accompany his spouse, who held a study permit. The officer refused the application after consulting the student compliance portal and concluding that the spouse was no longer actively pursuing full-time studies. The Court granted judicial review because the officer relied on changed information without allowing the applicant to explain that his spouse was on an authorized pregnancy-related medical leave.

Key Principle

Procedural fairness protections in visa and work permit applications are limited, but they are not meaningless. Applicants must generally provide complete evidence and establish eligibility. However, where an officer questions the accuracy or continuing truth of information that was accurate when submitted, the officer may be required to provide notice and an opportunity to respond. A refusal based on later information may be unfair if clarification could resolve the concern.

Background

The applicant applied for an open work permit on November 25, 2023, to accompany his spouse in Canada. At that time, she held a valid study permit, was enrolled full-time, and was actively pursuing her studies.

In February 2024, the spouse took an institutionally approved leave of absence because of pregnancy. She understood that she could retain full-time status and continue to be regarded as actively pursuing her studies if she resumed within 150 days.

When assessing the application, the officer consulted IRCC’s student compliance portal on April 29, 2024. The portal showed that the spouse was no longer registered but did not explain that she was on medical leave. Without requesting clarification, the officer refused the work permit on June 4, 2024.

The applicant argued that the officer should have requested updated information because the original evidence was accurate when submitted.

Court Findings

• Application Met the Requirements When Submitted

The Court found that November 25, 2023 was the operative date for assessing the application. At that time, the spouse was a full-time student actively pursuing her program, and the submitted information was accurate.

• Later Portal Information Required Clarification

The compliance portal created an apparent conflict with the original application. The issue was not whether the applicant had submitted insufficient evidence, but whether previously accurate information still reflected the spouse’s circumstances.

• Applicant Was Denied an Opportunity to Respond

The officer did not notify the applicant that the spouse’s registration status had become a concern. Had clarification been requested, the applicant could have explained the approved pregnancy-related leave and its effect on her status.

• Procedural Fairness Was Breached

The Court held that the applicant did not know the case he had to meet and was denied a fair opportunity to respond. Because this finding was decisive, the Court did not determine whether the refusal was substantively unreasonable.

Outcome

The Federal Court granted judicial review, set aside the June 4, 2024 refusal, and returned the open work permit application to a different officer for redetermination. No question was certified.

Case Citation:

Sungai v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 825 (CanLII)