Federal Court: 'Company in Name Only' Not Enough for Start-Up ICT Work Permit
- Citation
- 2026 FC 664
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-20350-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Roushenas et al. v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 664
An Iranian couple applied for a work permit under the International Mobility Program for an intra-company transfer to a newly incorporated Canadian start-up. The immigration officer refused the application, finding the applicants had not demonstrated that the Canadian company was a 'legitimate and continuing establishment' of a multinational enterprise.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review, finding the officer's decision was reasonable. The Court affirmed that for a start-up subsidiary, applicants must provide sufficient evidence of meaningful steps taken to establish the business beyond simple incorporation.
Key Quote from the Court
On the information before the officer, the finding that the Canadian subsidiary was not a legitimate and continuing establishment of the Iran-based parent company was entirely reasonable. The information demonstrated that, at best, the Canadian company existed in name only. The applicants have not been able to point to any relevant information the officer overlooked or misconstrued in making this finding.
Expert Takeaways
-
Demonstrate 'Meaningful Steps' for Start-Up ICTs For an intra-company transfer to a new Canadian venture, a business plan and incorporation documents are not enough. You must provide concrete evidence of active establishment, such as securing premises, demonstrating sufficient capital for operations, and having a detailed staffing plan.
-
The Burden of Proof is on the Applicant The court highlighted that the applicants could not show the officer overlooked any key evidence. The responsibility lies entirely with the applicant to submit a comprehensive and convincing application package that proves all program requirements are met from the outset.
-
Officers Apply Rules in Effect at the Time of Decision The court dismissed the argument that the officer applied future program changes. This case underscores that decisions are based on the regulations and guidelines in place when the application is assessed, and applicants must satisfy those specific criteria.
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.
Study, work, or visitor permit refused?
Many permit refusals are overturned on judicial review. Let us review your refusal letter.
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)