By Hamidreza Siavashpour, Canadian Immigration and Refugee Lawyer
Background & Key Facts
In December 2024, our client, a spouse of a foreign worker in Canada, was found inadmissible by a CBSA officer at the port of entry. Her husband held a valid work permit issued through an LMIA-supported job, and she was seeking to apply for an open work permit as the spouse of a foreign worker (a process that was still permitted at the border at that time).
During the officer’s review, a discrepancy was noted between the wage stated in the husband’s original work permit and the wage listed in a new confirmation of employment submitted in support of the client’s application. After several hours of questioning and investigation, the officer concluded that the documentation was not genuine. As a result, the application was refused, the client was found inadmissible due to misrepresentation, and she was allowed to re-enter Canada only to depart at the earliest opportunity. This inadmissibility finding carried serious consequences, including a five-year ban from entering Canada.
At this point, the client sought help from Heron Law Offices.
Process
Led by one of our lawyers, Dr. Hamidreza Siavashpour, our team undertook a detailed review of the client’s case. We examined the full record, including interview notes and documentation, and reached out to the husband’s employer. Our research confirmed that the wage increase had indeed been granted before the application. However, due to the employer’s limited knowledge of immigration processes, they had failed to provide the appropriate documentation, and struggled to explain the situation during an unplanned phone call initiated by the officer.
We developed a strategy that not only demonstrated the genuineness of the documentation but also highlighted a critical procedural flaw: any finding of inadmissibility at the border must be formalized through a section 44(1) report under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). That report must be referred to a Minister’s Delegate, and in some cases, to the Immigration Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board.
In this case, no such report was prepared and referred. The officer made an immediate finding of inadmissibility and refused the application at the border, thereby bypassing this statutory safeguard.
We initiated a judicial review in the Federal Court based on both the unreasonableness of the officer’s decision and the breach of procedural fairness. After comprehensive legal submissions and negotiations, we successfully reached a settlement with the Respondent’s counsel.
Outcome
The outcome was a full resolution in our client’s favour. The misrepresentation finding was vacated, and both the inadmissibility and the refusal of the work permit were completely removed from the client’s immigration history.
This result not only eliminated the risk of a five-year ban but also preserved the client’s future ability to submit immigration applications. For this family, it meant avoiding long-term separation and devastating consequences.
Call to Action
Even genuine applicants with strong intentions can face life-altering consequences when small errors or misunderstandings occur—especially at the border.
No application should be underestimated. You may think your case is straightforward—but are you fully prepared for unexpected challenges that may arise beyond your control?
Indeed, it is always better to invest in the strongest application rather than to fight against a refusal. If you think having a lawyer’s support in submitting your application is an extra cost, ask yourself this: can you afford the financial and emotional burden of a court case to challenge a refusal?
Let our experienced legal team take care of what matters most.
If you’re facing a misrepresentation finding, a refused application, or any immigration concern, contact Heron Law Offices today. We’re here to help you navigate the system with clarity, strategy, and compassion.
