Zhang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2016 FC 1057 : PGWP Refusal Upheld Because Student Did Not Meet the Continuous Full-Time Study Requirement

Ø  Introduction

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of a Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP) application because the officer was not satisfied that the applicant had continuously studied full-time in Canada.

The Court upheld the refusal, finding that the officer reasonably concluded that the applicant’s significant course withdrawals meant he had not maintained full-time studies, even though the educational institution characterized him as a full-time student.

Ø  Key Principle

For the PGWP, full-time study and the minimum program duration are separate requirements.

An applicant must continuously study full-time in Canada and complete a qualifying program that meets the required minimum duration. The fact that an educational institution considers a student to be full-time does not prevent an officer from independently assessing whether the PGWP requirement was actually satisfied.

Ø  Background

The applicant, a Chinese citizen, studied in Canada and later applied for a PGWP.

His academic record showed significant interruptions and reduced course loads. At St. Lawrence College, he withdrew from five of six courses during each of his first two semesters. He subsequently failed several courses, although he later completed additional semesters and graduated.

The officer concluded that the applicant had not continuously studied full-time in Canada and therefore did not meet the PGWP requirements.

The applicant argued that he had completed enough full-time study to satisfy the minimum eight-month requirement and that the college itself had characterized him as a full-time student.

Ø  Court Findings

The Federal Court found the officer’s decision reasonable.

The Court recognized that neither the legislation nor the policy specifically defined “studying full-time.” However, determining whether the applicant met that requirement was within the officer’s role and was entitled to deference.

The Court found it reasonable for the officer to conclude that withdrawing from most of the courses in which the applicant was enrolled meant that he was not studying full-time. The college’s characterization of him as a full-time student did not require the officer to accept that conclusion.

The Court also rejected the argument that completing two years of full-time studies within a longer program was sufficient. Relying on Rehman, the Court confirmed that full-time status and program duration are distinct requirements. The applicant had to satisfy both.

The Court also found no procedural fairness breach. The officer was assessing whether the applicant met the program requirement, not questioning the credibility or authenticity of his documents. Therefore, there was no obligation to give him an additional opportunity to respond.

Ø  Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review and upheld the PGWP refusal.

Case Citation:

Zhang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2016 FC 1057 CanLII