Maple News reports that the Federal Court of Canada has overturned two notable decisions by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), where work permit applications were rejected due to concerns over the applicants’ language proficiency. The court ruled that both rejections were unreasonable, highlighting the lack of clarity in the officers’ assessments and the failure to consider supporting evidence submitted by the applicants.
In the first case, Mehri Hosseinibay, an Iranian citizen, applied for a work permit under Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) to take up a role as a Construction Project Coordinator with a Canadian landscaping company. Her employer had secured a positive Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA), indicating a recognized need for her services. Despite this, her visa was denied by an IRCC officer who questioned her ability to perform the job due to language limitations.
However, the court found that the officer failed to explain how Mehri’s language ability was insufficient, particularly when there was no official language requirement for the role. Moreover, Mehri submitted IELTS results showing modest English skills and the employer confirmed she met the job’s requirements. The court concluded that the refusal lacked adequate justification and did not align with the evidence.
In the second case, Santokh Singh, a farm labourer from India, received a job offer for a farm worker position in British Columbia. The role required basic skills such as operating farm machinery and preparing produce for market, with no formal education or advanced language proficiency specified.
The visa officer issued a procedural fairness letter requesting more evidence of Santokh’s ability to understand safety protocols and equipment instructions. In response, Santokh provided comprehensive documentation — including educational certificates from English-medium institutions, a diploma in software application, and a letter from a local business owner verifying his mechanical knowledge. Despite this, his application was denied.
The court determined that IRCC failed to substantiate why the applicant’s documentation was insufficient, and emphasized the officer’s responsibility to provide clear reasoning when rejecting applications, especially when relevant proof is provided.
These rulings underscore the importance of consistency and transparency in IRCC’s decision-making. According to Maple News, this could set a precedent requiring visa officers to more rigorously justify refusals related to subjective criteria such as language ability — particularly when not explicitly tied to the job’s legal requirements.
For applicants and employers alike, these decisions reaffirm the role of Canada’s judicial system in safeguarding fair immigration practices and ensuring that qualified candidates are not unfairly denied work opportunities due to arbitrary or poorly supported assessments.