Maple News reports that the Federal Court of Canada has ruled in favor of an international student who was denied a study permit based on his past academic record and what an immigration officer deemed to be inconsistent educational goals. The court found that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) acted unreasonably in its decision to reject the applicant’s permit.
The case involved an Indian citizen who was accepted into the International Business Management graduate program at Niagara College in Toronto in 2021. Along with his acceptance letter, he submitted an application for a Canadian study permit and temporary resident visa. However, a few months later, IRCC refused the application, citing weak academic performance and inconsistencies in the applicant’s study objectives.
Specifically, the immigration officer pointed to the applicant’s undergraduate transcripts from the University of Mumbai, noting core subject grades ranging from 40% to 59%. The officer concluded that the applicant lacked the academic ability required to complete a Canadian graduate program. Moreover, the officer questioned the applicant’s switch in programs—from a previous application to a Data Analytics for Business course (which was initially refused) to the current International Business Management program—without adequate explanation.
The Federal Court disagreed with IRCC’s rationale. The judge pointed out that the officer failed to establish a clear, logical connection between the applicant’s past academic performance and his potential for success in the new program. The court emphasized that academic success is not solely determined by past grades and that an applicant may still thrive in a different academic setting or field.
In its ruling, the court referenced the case Patel v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), where it was affirmed that success in a program does not require excellence in prior academic history, and that many elements of academic performance can evolve over time.
Furthermore, the court criticized IRCC for disregarding the institutional judgment of Niagara College, which had accepted the applicant and believed he could succeed and contribute meaningfully to the program. The institution’s decision to admit the student was not given adequate weight in the immigration officer’s assessment.
Regarding the alleged inconsistency in educational goals, the court found the officer’s reasoning insufficient and lacking detail. The applicant had submitted a letter explaining his transition in academic focus, yet the officer did not address this justification in the refusal decision.
Ultimately, the Federal Court granted a judicial review, ruling that the study permit refusal was legally unjustified and lacked the transparency and clarity required by procedural fairness standards in Canadian immigration decisions.
This case underscores the importance of careful, individualized analysis in study permit decisions and reaffirms that prior academic performance should not automatically disqualify students from pursuing further education abroad.