Federal Court Rejects Open Work Permit Challenge Due to Insufficient Financial Evidence
📌 In brief
The Federal Court dismissed a challenge to the refusal of an open work permit due to insufficient financial evidence. The Court upheld the decision of the Officer, stating that the applicant did not provide enough proof of stable funds to support her stay in Canada.
⚖️ Legal holding
An applicant must provide sufficient evidence of stable funds to support their stay in Canada for an open work permit application to be approved.
📖 Technical summary
The Federal Court dismissed the judicial review application, upholding the Officer's decision to refuse the open work permit application due to insufficient financial evidence.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review application challenging the refusal of an open work permit due to insufficient financial evidence. The Court found that the Officer's decision was reasonable and supported by the evidence before them.
📚 Full judgment Official document
Date: 20260618 Docket: IMM-8512-24 Citation: 2026 FC 826 Ottawa, Ontario, June 18, 2026 PRESENT: Madam Justice Sadrehashemi BETWEEN: [NAME] Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent
REASONS AND
JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The Applicant, [NAME], applied for an open work permit based on her husband’s status as a student in Canada. An officer at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (the “Officer” ) refused the application. The Officer found that Ms. [NAME] had not demonstrated that she had sufficient, stable funds to support her stay in Canada. Ms. [NAME] challenges this refusal on judicial review. [ 2 ] Ms. [NAME] provided limited evidence relating to her financial ability to support herself in Canada. Ms. [NAME] provided one bank document that showed one lump sum deposit of 20 000 000 Nigerian Naira and a previous balance of 0. In a letter of support for her application, Ms. [NAME]’s spouse explained that he had transferred that money to her. Other than that statement, no other explanation was provided about the accumulation of funds or any other means Ms. [NAME] had to support herself in Canada. [ 3 ] On judicial review, Ms. [NAME] has provided a number of further documents to demonstrate her financial ability to support herself in Canada, including evidence related to her husband’s employment and banking information in Canada. Unfortunately, none of this information was before the Officer. I cannot consider it on judicial review because it was not before the Officer and does not fit into any of the exceptions to the new evidence rule on judicial review ( Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada v [NAME] (Access Copyright), 2012 FCA 22 at paras 19-20,23). [ 4 ] Based on the limited evidence before the Officer, it was open for them to find that Ms. [NAME]’s financial situation was insufficient to support her stated purpose of travel. I am not convinced that there is any serious shortcoming with the Officer’s determination. Overall, the Officer’s reasons are transparent, intelligible and justified. I do not see any basis to interfere with the decision. [ 5 ] I also do not find that there was any breach of procedural fairness in not providing Ms. [NAME] with an opportunity to respond to the Officer’s concern about sufficiency of funds. There was no extrinsic evidence considered or negative credibility finding made. In these circumstances, an applicant does not have to be notified to address concerns and gaps in the evidence ( [NAME] v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) , 2023 FC 1613 at para 21). [ 6 ] Neither party raised a question for certification and I agree none arises.
JUDGMENT in IMM-8512-24 THIS COURT’S
JUDGMENT is that 1. The application for judicial review is dismissed; and 2. No serious question of general importance is certified. blank "Lobat Sadrehashemi" blank Judge FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD Docket: IMM-8512-24 STYLE OF CAUSE: [NAME] v . THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION PLACE OF HEARING: VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE DATE OF HEARING: JUNE 16, 2026
REASONS FOR
JUDGMENT AND
JUDGMENT: SADREHASHEMI J DATED: JUNE 18, 2026 APPEARANCE : [NAME] For The Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD : [NAME] Department of Justice Canada Toronto, Ontario For The Respondent
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The officer correctly required financial evidence to support the applicant's stay in Canada.
- The officer's reasons for rejecting the application were clear and justified.
- There was no need to provide the applicant with additional opportunities to respond since no extrinsic evidence was considered.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The applicant provided insufficient evidence of stable funds to support her stay in Canada.
- Additional financial documents provided after the initial decision were not considered by the officer.
- The applicant did not offer a detailed explanation of how the funds were accumulated or how they would support her stay.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Federal Court dismissed the judicial review application, upholding the Officer's decision to refuse the open work permit application.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence of stable funds to support her stay in Canada.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the application, agreeing with the Officer that the applicant did not provide enough proof of financial stability.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were mentioned in the judgment.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was the lack of sufficient evidence showing the applicant's financial stability.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they provide strong evidence of financial stability when applying for an open work permit.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence that mattered included bank documents and a letter of support from the applicant's spouse.