Federal Court: Start-Up Visa Requires Real Canadian Business Activity, Not Just Plans
- Citation
- 2026 FC 1075
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-10402-24, IMM-10480-24, IMM-10482-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Samadi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 1075
An Iranian entrepreneur applied for a work permit under the Start-Up Visa Program for her role in a Canadian-incorporated company. The immigration officer refused the application, concluding the job offer was not genuine and the business lacked significant ties and activities within Canada, despite being incorporated for two years.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review, finding the officer's decision was reasonable. The Court affirmed that a lack of tangible business activity in Canada, such as a Canadian bank account and meaningful local partnerships, was a rational basis for refusal.
Key Quote from the Court
In my view, it was not unreasonable for the officer to consider the absence of a Canadian bank account to be evidence of the absence of significant business activity in Canada. Nor was it unreasonable for the officer to give limited weight to the contract with UIPatent given Mr. Ashgriz’s role in both companies. (at para 34)
Expert Takeaways
-
Demonstrate Tangible Canadian Operations Incorporating a company in Canada is not enough. Start-Up Visa applicants must provide concrete evidence of active business engagement within Canada, such as a business bank account, a physical address, and progress on Canadian-based projects.
-
Substance Over Form in Business Relationships The court upheld the officer's skepticism of relationships that may not be at arm's length. Relying on partnerships with entities where there is a clear overlap in leadership can weaken the perception of genuine Canadian business development.
-
Address Implied Concerns in Fairness Letters Even if a procedural fairness letter seems generic, applicants must read between the lines. The request for specific documents (like proof of a bank account or office) signals the officer's core concerns-in this case, the lack of a genuine Canadian presence.
-
The 'Significant Benefit' Test is Actively Assessed Following program changes, the onus is on the applicant to prove their start-up will create significant benefits for Canada. This decision shows that officers will rigorously scrutinize applications for evidence of this benefit, and a lack of progress in Canada will lead to a negative finding.
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.
Was your visa refused?
An IRCC refusal can often be challenged at the Federal Court of Canada — find out if yours qualifies.
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 Start-Up Visa / Business Class rulings
Federal Court Upholds Misrepresentation Finding for Undeclared Representative
Federal Court: Digital Start-Up Visa Applicants Must Justify Early Entry to Canada
Federal Court: Vague Plans & Last-Minute Efforts Doom Quebec Investor PR Application
Federal Court: Ministerial Instructions Can Justify Start-Up Visa Processing Delays
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)