Job Offer Gone? Court Clarifies Employer Liability for Recruiter Actions
- Citation
- 2025 BCCA 284
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-2643-23
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Mac’s Convenience Stores Inc. v. Basyal, 2025 BCCA 284 (CanLII)
A group of temporary foreign workers (TFWs) came to Canada for jobs at Mac’s Convenience Stores. They alleged that the recruitment firm hired by Mac's, Overseas Immigration Services, charged them illegal fees. A subgroup of these workers also arrived in Canada to find the promised jobs did not exist.
Court Ruling
The B.C. Court of Appeal overturned the lower court's decision, finding that Mac's was not vicariously liable for the recruiter's alleged breach of fiduciary duty because the recruiter was not a true "agent" in the legal sense. The Court also ruled that the workers whose jobs disappeared did have a legal duty to mitigate their losses by trying to find alternative employment.
Key Quote from the Court
The court distinguished between the everyday meaning of "agent" and the strict legal definition, which is crucial for determining liability: In my respectful view, the judge fell into error in this case because the parties failed to clearly distinguish between agency at law and agency in common parlance. It is the former that is pleaded and relied on by the plaintiffs in the underlying action, and it is agency at law that they must prove. (at para 34)
Expert Takeaways
-
"Agent" Has a Strict Legal Meaning An employer is not automatically liable for a recruiter's misconduct. For liability to attach through "agency," the recruiter must have the power to legally bind the employer in contracts with a third party. Simply hiring a firm to perform recruitment tasks is not enough to create a legal agency relationship.
-
Understand Program Declarations Employers using the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) sign declarations assuming responsibility for their recruiters' actions in complying with program rules. While this may not create vicarious liability for all wrongdoing, it creates significant regulatory risk and obligations.
-
Fixed-Term Contracts and the Duty to Mitigate In British Columbia, employees on fixed-term contracts who are terminated early have a duty to mitigate their losses. This means they must make reasonable efforts to find a new job. This duty applies even to TFWs who face significant practical barriers, such as employer-specific work permits.
-
The Contract is King The court noted that the employment contract itself contemplated the possibility of the worker changing employers. This express term made it impossible to imply a term that would remove the worker's duty to mitigate their losses. Clear and comprehensive contract terms are critical.
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.
Want a second look at your refusal?
We assess IRCC refusals and pursue judicial review at the Federal Court when the decision is unreasonable.
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 Refugee Claim / Asylum rulings
Federal Court Slams Refugee Board's 'Unreasonable' Credibility Findings
Federal Court: IRCC's Delays Cannot Justify Further Delays in Refugee PR Case
Federal Court: Failure to Prove Identity is Fatal to a Refugee Claim
Federal Court: Inconsistent Testimony Fatal to Refugee Credibility
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)