Federal Court Rejects Work Permit Application Due to Lack of Financial Proof

OUTCOME: Dismissed

Date: 20260618 Docket: IMM-8512-24 Citation: 2026 FC 826 Ottawa, Ontario, June 18, 2026 PRESENT: Madam Justice Sadrehashemi BETWEEN: [APPELLANT] Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent

REASONS AND

JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The Applicant, [APPELLANT], 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. [APPELLANT] had not demonstrated that she had sufficient, stable funds to support her stay in Canada. Ms. [APPELLANT] challenges this refusal on judicial review. [ 2 ] Ms. [APPELLANT] provided limited evidence relating to her financial ability to support herself in Canada. Ms. [APPELLANT] 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. [APPELLANT]’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. [APPELLANT] had to support herself in Canada. [ 3 ] On judicial review, Ms. [APPELLANT] 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. [APPELLANT]’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. [APPELLANT] 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: [APPELLANT] 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 : [APPELLANT] FOR THE APPLICANT [APPELLANT] For The Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD : [APPELLANT] For The APPLICANT [NAME] Department of Justice Canada Toronto, Ontario For The Respondent