Employment History Under Scrutiny: A FSWP Case Study

February 6, 2025

Agbai v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 101

Can You Fight an Immigration Refusal? The Agbai Case Offers Hope. When immigration decisions are challenged, judicial review steps in to ensure fairness. The Agbai v. Canada case provides a crucial example of how this process works, impacting both immigration applicants and practitioners. This blog post explores the case’s details, the Court’s reasoning, and its key takeaways.

Historical Context and Legal Framework

The Agbai case unfolded within the Federal Skilled Worker Program (FSWP), a key route for skilled foreign workers seeking Canadian permanent residence. The applicant, a Nigerian national, faced scrutiny regarding her employment history and supporting documents, leading to procedural fairness concerns and reconsideration decisions before reaching the Federal Court. Judicial review, guided by the Vavilov standard (2019 SCC 65), assesses the reasonableness of immigration decisions, focusing on transparency, intelligibility, and justification, rather than re-evaluating the evidence.

A Closer Look at the Facts

The applicant in Agbai faced concerns from the immigration officer about the authenticity of documents supporting her application. These concerns were primarily centered on the following issues:

  1. Employment History Misrepresentation :
    The applicant’s application did not disclose her employment at certain institutions, including St. Ann’s School and A-Z International High School. Evidence from these institutions revealed that the applicant had been transferred between the schools, suggesting a potential misrepresentation of her employment history.
  2. Timotex Employment:
    The applicant claimed to have worked at Timotex, a company that provided supporting documents for her application. However, investigations raised questions about the legitimacy of these documents. A report from the Lagos Police concluded that Timotex did not exist at the location specified in the applicant’s application, and the applicant’s past involvement in fraudulent activities was noted.
  3. Procedural Fairness:
    The applicant received a Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL) outlining concerns about her employment history and the authenticity of her supporting documents. The applicant was given an opportunity to address these issues and submit additional evidence, including affidavits from the president of Timotex. Despite these submissions, the officer and manager maintained their concerns about the applicant’s credibility.

Court’s Analysis and Decision

In Agbai, the Federal Court applied the reasonableness standard of review, as outlined in Vavilov. The Court’s task was not to reassess the evidence or substitute its own judgment but to determine whether the decision-making process was reasonable, transparent, and justified. The Court examined the evidence available to the officer and manager, particularly the concerns raised by third-party reports and inconsistencies in the applicant’s submissions.

  1. Evidence Considered by the Court :

The Court considered the evidence presented by the applicant, including affidavits and the Lagos Police Report. While some portions of the applicant’s affidavit were excluded as irrelevant or argumentative, the Court accepted the Lagos Police Report as credible evidence. The report, obtained from an independent third party, confirmed that Timotex did not exist at the location claimed by the applicant.

  1. Upholding the Immigration Decisions : 

The Court found that both the immigration officer and the manager acted reasonably in their decision-making. The officer’s conclusion that the applicant’s employment at Timotex was not substantiated by credible evidence was deemed reasonable. The manager, upon reviewing the case, also upheld the officer’s concerns, noting the inconsistencies in the applicant’s documents and the lack of supporting evidence, such as pay stubs.

The Court noted that the officer’s reliance on the Lagos Police Report and the inference that the applicant had not disclosed her employment at St. Ann’s School were reasonable and supported by the facts presented.

How the Applicant Challenged the Decision

The applicant raised several arguments in an attempt to overturn the decisions made by the officer and manager:

  1. Failure to Properly Assess Evidence: The applicant contended that the officer and manager had not adequately considered the documents from Timotex, which she claimed were authentic.
  2. Excessive Reliance on the Lagos Police Report: The applicant argued that too much weight had been placed on the Lagos Police Report, which she claimed was not definitive.
  3. Misunderstanding of Employment History: The applicant argued that the officer and manager had misunderstood her employment history, leading to an unjust decision.

However, the Court rejected these arguments. The Federal Court emphasized that its role was not to reassess the facts but to evaluate whether the reasoning process followed by the officer and manager was reasonable. The Court concluded that the officer and manager had acted within their discretion and that the evidence supported their conclusions.

Legal Precedents and the Agbai Decision

The Agbai decision draws on several key precedents in immigration law, which clarify the standards for evidence admissibility and the application of reasonableness. Notable cases referenced in the Court’s analysis include:

  • Patel v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 999: This case affirmed the admissibility of GCMS (Global Case Management System) notes as part of the reasoning process for immigration decisions.
  • Foumani v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 574: This decision highlighted the importance of interpreting the reasoning of decision-makers in a holistic and contextual manner.

While Agbai did not explicitly overturn any earlier decisions, it reinforced the application of the Vavilov principles in assessing the reasonableness of immigration decisions and the weight to be given to third-party reports.

Key Takeaways for Applicants and Practitioners

The Agbai case underscores several critical lessons for applicants and immigration practitioners:

  1. Importance of Full Disclosure: Applicants must provide complete and accurate information in their immigration applications. Any omissions or misrepresentations can lead to serious consequences, including the rejection of the application and the possibility of judicial review.
  2. Transparency and Justification: Immigration decision-makers must base their conclusions on clear and transparent reasoning, supported by evidence. In Agbai, the Court emphasized the need for decisions to be justified, particularly when third-party evidence, like the Lagos Police Report, is used.
  3. Reasonableness Standard: The Vavilov framework continues to shape judicial reviews of immigration decisions. Courts assess the reasonableness of decisions based on whether the decision-making process was coherent and aligned with legal principles, not by re-evaluating the evidence.
  4. Third-Party Evidence: The case demonstrates the significance of third-party reports in immigration decisions. In this case, the Lagos Police Report played a central role in assessing the credibility of the applicant’s claims.

A Lesson in Immigration Law

The Agbai decision is a significant example of how judicial review operates in the context of Canadian immigration law. It highlights the importance of procedural fairness, the reasonableness standard, and the role of supporting evidence in determining the outcome of an immigration application. For applicants, the case serves as a reminder of the critical need for accuracy and transparency in all submissions. For immigration practitioners, it reinforces the importance of ensuring that decisions are well-supported by credible evidence and align with established legal principles. Ultimately, the Agbai case affirms the rigorous standards applied in the judicial review process and the essential role of evidence in immigration law decisions.