Federal Court: Can't Raise New Arguments on Judicial Review of Refugee Denial
- Citation
- 2025 FC 1404
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-5227-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Khan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1404
A citizen of Bangladesh sought refugee protection due to threats from an extremist group. The Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) denied his claim, finding he had a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) within Bangladesh and it was not unreasonable for him to relocate.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review, upholding the RAD's decision as reasonable. The Court affirmed the critical legal principle that an applicant cannot introduce new arguments during a judicial review that were not first raised before the administrative tribunal.
Key Quote from the Court
It is not open to the Applicant to raise new arguments on judicial review that were not before the administrative decision-maker (Singh). An argument or issue is new when it raises a new basis for potentially finding an error in the decision under appeal or review beyond the grounds of appeal as framed by the parties.
Expert Takeaways
-
Preserve Your Arguments for Appeal This case is a stark reminder that all key arguments and evidence must be presented to the administrative tribunal (e.g., the RAD). The Federal Court will generally refuse to consider new issues raised for the first time during judicial review.
-
Credibility Alone Is Not Enough The decision-maker found the applicant's testimony credible, yet the claim was still denied. This highlights that a credible fear in one location does not guarantee refugee status if a safe and reasonable internal flight alternative (IFA) is found to exist elsewhere in the country.
-
Personalize the Risk for an IFA To successfully argue that an IFA is unreasonable, an applicant must provide specific evidence showing why the risk applies to them personally in the proposed location. Relying on general country condition reports about risks to high-profile activists is insufficient if the applicant does not share that public profile.
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 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)