Federal Court: Part-Time Studies Disqualify Student from PGWP, No Exceptions
- Citation
- 2026 FC 422
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-24085-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 422
The applicant, an international student, sought judicial review after an IRCC officer refused his Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP) and restoration of status applications. The refusal was based on the fact that he had not maintained full-time student status for every academic session, specifically being part-time during the Winter 2019 and Fall 2023 terms.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court dismissed the application, finding the officer's decision to be reasonable. The Court affirmed that the requirement to maintain full-time status for PGWP eligibility is strict, and studying on a part-time basis is not equivalent to an 'authorized leave from studies,' which is a specific exception.
Key Quote from the Court
Considering that the Applicant's own evidence that he was a part-time student during the Winter 2019 term and that his part-time status had been confirmed by his DLI, there was no requirement for the Officer to explicitly consider and refute the Applicant's argument that he was 'on leave' from his studies during the Winter 2019 term because he was not 'on leave'; he had continued to study, but on a part-time basis. The Applicant's argument had no basis in fact and had been contradicted by his own evidence. (at para 27)
Expert Takeaways
-
Full-Time Status is Non-Negotiable for PGWP This case is a stark reminder that the requirement to maintain full-time student status during each academic session (except the final one) is strictly enforced for PGWP eligibility. Reducing your course load to part-time, even for valid medical or personal reasons, can render you ineligible. It is not considered a 'leave from studies'.
-
Apply for the Correct Restoration To restore status and apply for a PGWP, you must first apply to restore your *student status* by applying for a new study permit. Filing a work permit application (IMM 5710) is incorrect and will fail, as there is no underlying valid status to support it.
-
University Permission vs. IRCC Rules A Designated Learning Institution (DLI) may permit a student to study part-time, but this does not override IRCC's separate and distinct requirements for PGWP eligibility. Students must be aware of and comply with both sets of rules.
-
A Pending TRP Application May Suffice The Court found that an officer's brief note in the GCMS that a TRP application was 'in progress' was sufficient to demonstrate that a separate request for a TRP was considered. This shows that even a minimal acknowledgment can satisfy the requirement for an officer to consider all requests.
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 again after reconsideration?
The Federal Court can still review your case — let's talk about your options.
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 Restoration of Status rulings
Court Confirms: Misleading IRCC Letter Can't Extend 90-Day Restoration Deadline
Federal Court: 90-Day Restoration Deadline is Absolute, Previous Applications Don't Extend It
Federal Court: No Evidence of Home Ties Sinks Visitor Status Restoration
Federal Court: Proving Lawyer Incompetence Is Not Enough; You Must Prove Prejudice
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)