Can a Refused Canadian Work Permit Application Be Judicially Reviewed in Federal Court?

Unlike certain family sponsorship or removal order decisions that carry an automatic right of appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD), temporary resident applications—including work permits, study permits, and visitor visas—carry no statutory right of administrative appeal.

The sole legal recourse to challenge an erroneous or unfair refusal by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) or a visa post abroad is an Application for Leave and Judicial Review in the Federal Court of Canada under section 72 of the IRPA.

Following the landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov (2019 SCC 65), the presumptive standard of review for substantive visa decisions is reasonableness.

A decision is unreasonable if it lacks an internally coherent reasoning chain, ignores material evidence submitted by the applicant, relies on speculative inferences, or fails to engage with the core legal test for the specific work permit category (such as LMIA exemptions or Intra-Company Transferee requirements).

Breaches of procedural fairness—such as relying on extrinsic information without providing the applicant an opportunity to respond, or issuing a refusal based on credibility concerns without a Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL)—are reviewed on a standard of correctness.

Section 72(2)(b) of the IRPA establishes strict limitation periods for commencing a judicial review in the Federal Court: 15 days from receiving notice of refusal if the decision was rendered inside Canada, or 60 days if rendered outside Canada.

Because extensions of time are granted only in exceptional circumstances where an applicant demonstrates a continuing intention and a reasonable explanation for delay, immediate legal counsel is essential.