Court: Officer Cannot Demand Photos Without First Doubting Your Story
- Citation
- 2025 FC 1536
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-13394-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Shahidullah v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1536
The applicant, a citizen of Bangladesh, had his Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) rejected. The immigration officer concluded there was insufficient evidence of risk, repeatedly faulting the applicant for not providing photographs, news reports, or police complaints to support his claims of persecution.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court found the officer's decision unreasonable and allowed the judicial review. The Court affirmed the principle that an officer cannot demand corroborative evidence without first providing a valid reason to question the applicant's credibility or explaining why their testimony alone is insufficient.
Key Quote from the Court
This Court has held there is no general requirement for corroboration and it would be an error to make a credibility finding based on the absence of corroborative evidence alone... This is what the Officer has done in this case.
Expert Takeaways
-
Your Testimony Can Be Enough This case confirms that an applicant's sworn testimony can be sufficient to establish their case. An officer cannot simply dismiss your claim because you don't have 'hard' evidence like photos or police reports.
-
Officers Must Justify Doubts If an officer finds your evidence insufficient, they must explain why. They cannot just point to a lack of corroborating documents without first assessing the credibility of the evidence you did provide.
-
The 'No Credibility Finding' Trap By not making a formal credibility finding, the officer tried to sidestep the need to justify their doubts. The Court saw through this, treating the repeated requests for corroboration as an implicit, and improper, negative credibility finding.
-
Strengthen Your Narrative While not legally required, providing any available corroborative evidence is always a best practice. However, if such evidence doesn't exist or is unsafe to obtain, clearly explain why in your submissions.
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.
Refused by IRCC?
You may have only 15 to 60 days to challenge the decision. Speak with our team before the deadline passes.
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 Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) rulings
Federal Court: Winning Judicial Review Doesn't Guarantee Legal Costs
Court: Officers Can't Demand 'Exact' Details While Ignoring Real Refugee Risk
Federal Court: Refusal Based on "Insufficient Evidence" is a Credibility Finding
Federal Court Overturns PRRA Refusal for Relying on Outdated Country Information
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)