![\"\"](\"https:\/\/heronlaw.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/DALL\u00b7E-2023-04-27-08.44.50-Immigrant-loses-his-job-and-is-very-confused.png\")
Case Study: <\/strong>An Applicant receives an Invitation to Apply (“ITA”) under the Canadian Experience Class (“CEC”) in February 2023. Their score is 30 points above the cut-off for the draw and they received 50 points for an arranged employment offer. They apply and submit their Electronic Application for Permanent Residence (“eAPR”) in March 2023 and the application is considered complete. In the beginning of April 2023, they are terminated from their position. They wonder both: (1) whether there is an obligation to update IRCC; and (2) will the job loss have any impact on their CEC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One would assume, on the face, that a material change in circumstance to an application such as a loss of jobs that contributed would impact the application and would need to be disclosed. From a disclosure perspective, the loss of employment for a job that was given CRS points\/arranged employment was based on seems like a reasonable thing to do – particularly to hedge against misrepresentation concerns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, there are some important nuances in how the CEC application may be impacted. Read ahead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Law and Policy<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Usually I like to use the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act <\/em>(“IRPA<\/em>“) as the starting point but in the nuanced way the sections work, IRCC’s program delivery instructions (PDIs) here <\/a>actually provide the best starting point.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is written:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Section 11.2<\/a> of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act<\/em> (IRPA) includes a new authority that supports the Express Entry system.<\/p> Under section A11.2, an officer may not issue a visa to an applicant who did not or does not meet the Express Entry minimum entry criteria (MEC) or did not or does not possess the qualifications for which they received their CRS score at the time when<\/span><\/p> – the invitation to apply (ITA) was issued; or<\/span><\/p> – the e-APR was received by IRCC.<\/span><\/p> When reviewing an application, processing offices must determine if<\/p> – the applicant possesses the qualifications that they declared in their e-APR<\/span>, as corroborated by the applicant\u2019s supporting documentation; and<\/p> – when the applicant submits their e-APR, the information provided in their Express Entry profile has not materially changed to the degree that the applicant would not have been issued an ITA in that round of invitations.<\/p> Accordingly, officers should refuse an application under section A11.2 if it is determined that<\/p> – at the time of the ITA or e-APR,<\/span> the applicant did not or does not meet the MEC, which includes the requirements of the program to which they were invited to apply; or<\/p> – the applicant\u2019s recalculated CRS score has fallen below that of the lowest-ranked candidate invited to apply in that round of invitations<\/a>.<\/p>(Emphasis added)<\/span><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n From this, we can gleam that the CRS score calculation is being examined at the point of the application’s submission from the starting point of the ITA. Absent is language that the points must be maintained throughout the duration of an application’s processing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The relevant legal provisions of the IRPA <\/em>supports this interpretation:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Visa or other document not to be issue<\/p> 11.2<\/strong><\/a><\/strong> (1)<\/strong> An officer may not issue a visa or other document in respect of an application for permanent residence to a foreign national who was issued an invitation under Division 0.1 to make that application if \u2014 at the time the invitation was issued or at the time the officer received their application<\/span> \u2014 the foreign national<\/p> (a)<\/strong> did not meet the criteria set out in an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(e);<\/p> (b)<\/strong> did not have the qualifications on the basis of which they were ranked under an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(h) and were issued the invitation; or<\/span><\/p> (c)<\/strong> did not meet the criteria for membership in a category that was established in an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(h.2), if they were issued an invitation on the basis that they were eligible to be a member of that category.<\/span><\/p> Exceptions (2)<\/strong> Despite subsection (1), an officer may issue the visa or other document if, at the time the officer received their application,<\/p> (a)<\/strong> the foreign national did not meet the criteria set out in an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(e) \u2014 or they did not have the qualifications on the basis of which they were ranked under an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(h) or did not meet the criteria for membership in a category that was established in an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(h.2) \u2014 because the foreign national\u2019s birthday occurred after the invitation was issued; or<\/p> (b)<\/strong> the foreign national did not have the qualifications they had at the time the invitation was issued and on the basis of which they were ranked under an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(h), but<\/p> (i)<\/strong> they met the criteria set out in an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(e),<\/span><\/p> (i.1)<\/strong> they met the criteria for membership of a category established in an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(h.2), if they were issued the invitation on the basis that they were eligible to be a member of that category, and<\/p> (ii)<\/strong> they occupied a rank that is not lower than the rank that a foreign national was required to have occupied to be invited to make an application.<\/span><\/p>(emphasis added)<\/span><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n However, there is silence in the regulations and legislation on what happens post e-APR submission if there is a loss of a job (and points). There is also confusing terminology in the Ministerial Instructions<\/a>, <\/em>which could lead to different interpretation. The current MIs state: <\/p>\n\n\n\n Loss of offer or inability to perform duties<\/strong><\/p> (3) If the offer referred to in subsection (1) is revoked or ceases to be a qualifying offer of arranged employment or if the foreign national is unable to perform the duties of the employment or is unlikely to agree to perform them, the foreign national is no longer entitled to the points assigned under subsection (1) in respect of that offer and the total number of points assigned to the foreign national under the Comprehensive Ranking System is to be adjusted accordingly.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Key is, there is no duration mentioned in the MIs so we should look to the policy interpretation for this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Here is what the same PDIs <\/a>say:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/heronlaw.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/Immreps-response-1024x311.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n