Canada Earthquake Policy: Physical Presence Required for Work Permits
- Citation
- 2025 FC 1359
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-1322-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Sinem Cetin v. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, 2025 FC 1359
Applicants, nationals of Türkiye and Syria, were refused work permits under a Temporary Public Policy (TPP) designed for earthquake victims, as immigration officers found they were not physically present in Canada when the decisions were rendered.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court dismissed the applications for judicial review, upholding the immigration officers' interpretation that the TPP required physical presence in Canada at the time of decision. The Court found no unreasonable interpretation of the TPP, no breach of procedural fairness, and no question of general importance.
Key Quote from the Court
An individual outside Canada at the time the Officer is able to consider whether to “grant an exemption” is neither able to satisfy the condition that they be currently present in Canada nor the condition that they have valid temporary resident status. [...] The Officers’ interpretation of the TPP and the resulting refusal decisions are reasonable. (at paras 41, 43)
Expert Takeaways
-
Understand Policy Nuances Always scrutinize the specific wording and intent of any temporary public policy. Even if an initial application seems straightforward, underlying requirements like physical presence at the time of decision can be critical.
-
Official Communication is Key While informal advice from IRCC officials or consultants can be helpful, rely primarily on official policy documents and formal guidance from IRCC. Misinterpretations can have significant consequences.
-
Physical Presence Matters For certain temporary resident programs, being physically present in Canada at the time of decision may be an implied or explicit requirement, even if not explicitly stated as an ongoing condition throughout processing.
-
Settlement Agreements Cure Fairness Issues If a previous refusal was challenged and led to a settlement agreement for reassessment, ensure full compliance with the terms, as these agreements can effectively remedy prior procedural fairness concerns.
There is a deadline on this
That is the window to file an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review at the Federal Court, counted from the day you were notified of the decision. An extension can be requested, but it is granted at the Court's discretion - it is not automatic.
Check my deadlineDoes this ruling apply to your situation?
Tick whatever is true for you. Nothing is sent anywhere - this stays in your browser.
That combination is worth a proper look. It does not mean you have a case - only a lawyer reading your actual documents can say that - but it does mean the question is worth asking before your filing window closes.
Disclaimer
The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law is complex and subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please schedule a consultation with a qualified legal professional.
Disagree with your IRCC decision?
Find out whether your refusal can be challenged at the Federal Court of Canada.
No obligation - we review your documents and tell you if a Federal Court application is realistic.
Questions people ask after reading a case like this
Does this mean my own case will succeed?
No. Every application is decided on its own record. A reported decision shows how the Federal Court has reasoned about a particular kind of error - it does not predict the result of a different file. What it can tell you is whether the problem in your refusal is the kind of problem the Court has been willing to intervene on.
How long do I have to challenge a refusal?
Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act you generally have 15 days to file an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review if the decision was made inside Canada, and 60 days if it was made outside Canada, counted from when you were notified. The Court can extend that period, but an extension is discretionary - it is not automatic.
What actually happens at the Federal Court?
Judicial review has two stages. You file the application and a written record, and a judge decides on paper whether to grant leave - permission for the case to proceed. If leave is granted, there is a hearing. The Court does not re-decide your immigration application; it decides whether the officer's decision was reasonable and procedurally fair. If you succeed, the file is normally sent back to be decided again by a different officer.
Do I have to be in Canada to bring an application?
No. Applicants outside Canada regularly bring judicial review applications, which is why the longer 60-day deadline exists for decisions made abroad. Applicants are not normally required to attend in person.
What happens in the free 15-minute review?
You explain what was refused or delayed and when you were notified. We tell you whether your filing window is still open, which issues in the decision look arguable, and what the realistic options are - including reapplying instead of litigating, where that is the better route. There is no obligation to retain us afterwards.
More Work Permit rulings
Federal Court Upholds Misrepresentation Finding from Single Verification Call
Federal Court Upholds Refusal: Weak Ties Doom Family Reunification Visas
Federal Court Overturns Work Permit Refusal, Citing Lack of Proper Analysis
Federal Court: IRCC Cannot Repeat Flawed Reasoning in Redetermination
Written by
Ali Dadkhah
Ali Dadkhah is a litigator whose practice is dedicated to challenging government decisions at the Federal Court of Canada. He specializes in judicial review, providing a crucial avenue for recourse for individuals and businesses who have faced unfair or unreasonable administrative outcomes. Bilingual legal support in English and Persian (Farsi)