Federal Court Denies Costs Despite IRCC Conceding Unreasonable Work Permit Refusal
- Citation
- 2026 FC 606
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-28284-25
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Prakash Kumta Mohandas v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 606
An applicant, after facing four work permit refusals, challenged the latest decision at the Federal Court. The government's lawyers agreed the refusal was unreasonable and asked the Court to send it back for redetermination, but argued against any special instructions or awarding legal costs to the applicant.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court granted the judicial review, setting aside the unreasonable refusal. However, it sided with the government, ruling that the applicant's history of multiple refusals, even if based on similar errors, did not constitute the 'exceptional circumstances' or 'endless merry-go-round' required to issue special directions or award costs.
Key Quote from the Court
That separate decision-makers dealing with separate and distinct work permit applications may have similarly erred by failing to link the use of boilerplate language to the evidence does not disclose special reasons warranting an award of costs. Similarly, refusal decisions that were never challenged cannot be relied upon to justify special reasons for an award of costs as the Applicants argue. (at para 24, 9)
Expert Takeaways
-
High Bar for Costs and Directions This case reaffirms that the threshold for awarding costs or issuing specific directions to a new decision-maker is exceptionally high. Simply having multiple refusals, even if flawed, is not enough to prove a 'merry-go-round' of litigation.
-
Each Application Stands Alone The Court treats fresh applications as distinct from previous ones. Errors made by different officers on separate applications, even if similar, are not automatically seen as a systemic failure justifying special court intervention.
-
Challenging Every Refusal Matters The Court noted that previously unchallenged refusals cannot be used to argue for special remedies later on. If you believe a refusal is unreasonable, it is crucial to seek a judicial review for that specific decision.
-
Consent Motions Are Not an Automatic Win on Costs When the government consents to judgment, it secures a redetermination for the applicant. However, applicants should not assume this means they will recover their legal fees. A separate, strong argument for 'special reasons' is required.
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.
Spousal or PR application refused?
Federal Court judicial review may be your path to overturn an unreasonable IRCC decision.
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: Insufficient Evidence is a Fatal Flaw in Work Permit Applications
Federal Court: Weak Home Country Ties Can Sink a Work Permit, Even if Other Refusal Reasons Fail
Work Permit Refused: Why Your CV Must Match Every Job Duty in the NOC
Federal Court Overturns Refusal Due to IRCC’s Incomplete File
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)