Logo of A&M Canadian Immigration law Corporation

Wei v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 982 : Self-Employed Class Refusal Upheld Where Applicant Failed to Demonstrate a Concrete Canadian Business Plan, Ability, and Genuine Intention to Carry It Out

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of a permanent residence application under the Self-Employed Persons Class in the cultural activities category.

The applicant was a wealthy Chinese businessman with extensive experience in film, television, publishing, and cultural industries. Although he had qualifying past experience, the officer was not satisfied that he had demonstrated a sufficiently concrete plan, ability, or genuine intention to establish himself as a self-employed film and television producer in Canada.

The Court upheld the refusal, emphasizing that past experience alone does not establish that an applicant will actually carry out a proposed self-employed activity in Canada.

Key Principle

To qualify as a self-employed person, an applicant must establish more than relevant past experience.

The applicant must also demonstrate both the intention and ability to be self-employed in Canada and to make a significant contribution to the specified economic activity.

Where the proposed venture is future-oriented, an officer may reasonably expect concrete evidence of preparation, research, planning, and prior commitment showing that the applicant is likely to proceed with the venture after obtaining permanent residence.

Background

The applicant had an estimated net worth of approximately CAD $20 million and significant experience purchasing and selling television dramas and films, as well as working as a producer, publisher, and director.

He proposed establishing a Vancouver company involved in film and television production and cultural communication between Canada and China.

During an interview, however, he was unable to provide detailed information concerning production costs, wages, potential clients, Canadian competition, work permits for foreign crew, marketing strategies, or the practical steps required to operate the proposed Canadian venture.

He also indicated that he would rely substantially on friends and liaison companies to carry out important aspects of the business.

Court Findings

The Court found ample evidence supporting the officer’s concerns.

The applicant’s proposed television project remained at an early planning stage. He could not explain important operational details, had not identified prospective Canadian clients, had not undertaken substantial market research, and had not demonstrated meaningful participation in earlier Canadian productions.

The Court rejected the applicant’s challenge to the accuracy of the officer’s interview notes. The notes were detailed and contemporaneous, while the applicant produced little objective evidence contradicting them.

The Court placed particular emphasis on the concepts of ability and intention.

For a complex venture such as producing a 30-episode television series, ability required evidence showing how the project would actually be executed, including planning, personnel, production, financing, marketing, and Canadian participation.

Intention similarly required more than statements about future plans. Because permanent residence would be granted before the proposed project was completed, the applicant needed to show meaningful prior steps and commitments demonstrating that the venture was likely to proceed.

The Court also upheld the officer’s consideration of the applicant’s inability to speak either official language as one factor in assessing his ability to successfully implement a complicated cultural business in Canada.

Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review, finding that the officer reasonably concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated the required intention and ability to establish himself as a self-employed person making a significant cultural contribution in Canada.

 

Case Citation:

Wei v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 982 CanLII

Visit our Social Media:

CATEGORIES

Case Law Library (945)Case Law Update - January 2026 (13)Case Law Update - February 2026 (9)Case Law Update - March 2026 (12)Case Law Update - April 2026 (9)Case Law Update - May 2018 (4)Case Law Update - May 2019 (3)Case Law Update - May 2020 (4)Case Law Update - May 2021 (6)Case Law Update - May 2022 (10)Case Law Update - May 2023 (10)Case Law Update - May 2024 (13)Case Law Update - May 2026 (10)Case Law Update – May 2025 (18)Case Law Update - June 2026 (24)Case Law Update - Apr. 2018 (7)Case Law Update - Apr. 2019 (6)Case Law Update - Apr. 2020 (8)Case Law Update - Apr. 2022 (11)Case Law Update - Apr. 2023 (11)Case Law Update - Apr. 2024 (14)Case Law Update - Aug. 2018 (5)Case Law Update - Aug. 2019 (4)Case Law Update - Aug. 2020 (5)Case Law Update - Aug. 2021 (8)Case Law Update - Aug. 2022 (7)Case Law Update - Aug. 2023 (10)Case Law Update - Aug. 2024 (7)Case Law Update - Aug. 2026 (8)Case Law Update - Dec. 2018 (7)Case Law Update - Dec. 2020 (5)Case Law Update - Dec. 2021 (9)Case Law Update - Dec. 2023 (6)Case Law Update - Dec. 2024 (15)Case Law Update - Dec. 2025 (11)Case Law Update - Feb. 2018 (8)Case Law Update - Feb. 2019 (6)Case Law Update - Feb. 2020 (7)Case Law Update - Feb. 2021 (3)Case Law Update - Feb. 2022 (11)Case Law Update - Feb. 2023 (14)Case Law Update - Feb. 2024 (16)Case Law Update - Jan. 2018 (8)Case Law Update - Jan. 2019 (6)Case Law Update - Jan. 2020 (11)Case Law Update - Jan. 2021 (3)Case Law Update - Jan. 2022 (7)Case Law Update - Jan. 2023 (9)Case Law Update - Jan. 2024 (13)Case Law Update - Jul. 2018 (8)Case Law Update - Jul. 2019 (7)Case Law Update - Jul. 2021 (9)Case Law Update - Jul. 2022 (7)Case Law Update - Jul. 2023 (11)Case Law Update - Jul. 2024 (16)Case Law Update - Jul. 2025 (16)Case Law Update - Jul. 2026 (13)Case Law Update - Jun. 2018 (6)Case Law Update - Jun. 2019 (6)Case Law Update - Jun. 2020 (4)Case Law Update - Jun. 2021 (14)Case Law Update - Jun. 2022 (9)Case Law Update - Jun. 2023 (10)Case Law Update - Jun. 2024 (16)Case Law Update - Jun. 2025 (9)Case Law Update - Mar. 2018 (9)Case Law Update - Mar. 2019 (8)Case Law Update - Mar. 2020 (9)Case Law Update - Mar. 2021 (2)Case Law Update - Mar. 2022 (10)Case Law Update - Mar. 2023 (11)Case Law Update - Mar. 2024 (15)Case Law Update - Nov. 2018 (5)Case Law Update - Nov. 2020 (2)Case Law Update - Nov. 2021 (11)Case Law Update - Nov. 2023 (12)Case Law Update - Nov. 2024 (14)Case Law Update - Nov. 2025 (11)Case Law Update - Oct. 2018 (8)Case Law Update - Oct. 2020 (1)Case Law Update - Oct. 2021 (10)Case Law Update - Oct. 2023 (10)Case Law Update - Oct. 2024 (16)Case Law Update - Oct. 2025 (13)Case Law Update - Sep. 2018 (5)Case Law Update - Sep. 2019 (7)Case Law Update - Sep. 2020 (3)Case Law Update - Sep. 2021 (10)Case Law Update - Sep. 2022 (10)Case Law Update - Sep. 2023 (6)Case Law Update - Sep. 2024 (15)Case Law Update - Sep. 2025 (17)Case Law Update - Sep. 2026 (13)Case Law Update – Apr. 2021 (4)Case Law Update – Apr. 2025 (9)Case Law Update – Aug. 2025 (8)Case Law Update – Dec. 2022 (10)Case Law Update – Feb. 2025 (8)Case Law Update – Jan. 2025 (17)Case Law Update – Mar. 2025 (17)Case Law Update – Nov. 2022 (11)Case Law Update – Oct. 2022 (6)

About The Author

Picture of Dr. Muhammad Abrar

Dr. Muhammad Abrar

Barrister & Solicitor

From temporary status to PR, get expert legal help to choose the right immigration pathway.

Contact our office for details. Our immigration legal service in Winnipeg will assess your eligibility per CIC criteria and submit your application.