Court Upholds PGWP Refusal: Final Work Placement Defines 'Final Semester'
- Citation
- 2025 FC 1478
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-18826-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1478
The applicant, a graduate of two one-year certificate programs, was refused a Post-Graduate Work Permit (PGWP). The refusal was based on her being a part-time student in the semester immediately preceding her final, mandatory work placement.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court dismissed the judicial review, finding the officer's decision was reasonable. The Court affirmed that the 'final semester' is the very last session required for graduation, which, in this case, was the work placement, not the preceding academic term.
Key Quote from the Court
When considering the reasonableness of an administrative decision, the Court generally will defer to a reasonable interpretation made by an administrative decision-maker, even if other reasonable interpretations may exist... Here, I am not persuaded that it was unreasonable for the Officer to conclude that the fall 2023 semester was not the final semester.
Expert Takeaways
-
Defining the 'Final Semester' for PGWP This case clarifies that the 'final semester' for PGWP eligibility is the last component required to complete your program. If a mandatory work placement or practicum follows your last in-class semester, the placement is your final semester, not the academic term before it.
-
Maintain Full-Time Status Rigorously Students must maintain full-time status in every semester of their program, except for the actual final semester. Dropping to part-time status in any other semester, even to improve a GPA for a future requirement, jeopardizes PGWP eligibility.
-
Work Placements Are Academic Requirements The Court confirmed that a mandatory work placement that grants academic credit is an integral part of the program of study. It cannot be treated as separate from 'academic' coursework when determining program completion timelines and student status.
-
Reasonableness is a High Bar to Overcome The Court will not substitute its own decision for the officer's if the officer's conclusion is rational and supported by the evidence. The burden is on the applicant to prove the decision was unreasonable, not just that a different outcome was possible.
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.
Your window to challenge is closing.
Judicial review of an IRCC refusal is time-sensitive. Book a consultation before your deadline.
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)