Explore the latest ImmPulse Weekly for key Canadian immigration insights—or browse past editions to catch up.
Despite a critical shortage of care workers across Canada, many foreign caregivers currently working in the country are being forced to leave due to recent federal immigration cuts and the suspension of dedicated residency pathways. Registered early childhood educators like Mehak Kapoor, who have spent years studying and working in Ontario, now face expiring work permits with no clear route to permanent residency. Experts warn that tightening immigration levels—including the halting of the Home Care Worker Immigration pilot—is creating a “lose-lose situation” that pushes essential, predominantly racialized migrant women into undocumented status or out of the country entirely, even as the demand for elder and child care is projected to skyrocket.
The Department of Justice has accused 430 Chinese immigration applicants of misrepresentation for using unauthorized “ghost agents” to file mandamus applications intended to fast-track their delayed visas. These applications were flagged by the Federal Court due to identical formatting, phrasing, and contact information, despite applicants claiming to be self-represented. While the government seeks to dismiss these cases to address a massive court backlog, which surged from 7,782 proceedings in 2019 to over 24,000 in 2024, applicants argue that they turned to these agents out of desperation due to “black box” processing delays and a lack of transparent communication from immigration officials. Although officials maintain that public awareness campaigns are the best defense against such fraud, those caught in the dragnet claim they were unaware the practice was unlawful and feel the system is punishing the victims rather than the unregulated agents profiting from the delays.
On February 26, 2026, these technical amendments (SOR/2026-40) address issues identified by the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations to ensure consistency and clarity within the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations. The updates align discrepancies between the English and French versions in subsections 253(2) and 255(3)(b) regarding “reasonable care” and “reasonable efforts,” while also correcting a grammatical error in the French text of subsection 258(3). Furthermore, the English version of subsection 258(3) was amended to replace “will” with “shall” to clearly indicate a mandatory duty regarding the disposal of seized documents, confirming they must be held only as long as necessary for the administration of Canadian laws before being returned to the issuing authority or disposed of legally.
Sponsored by the Minister of Public Safety, this House Government Bill aims to enhance border security and the integrity of the Canadian immigration system. As of March 12, 2026, the bill has completed third reading in the Senate and a message regarding Senate amendments has been sent to the House of Commons for consideration. This follows a legislative process where the bill was first introduced in the House of Commons on October 8, 2025, and subsequently referred to the Standing Senate Committee on National Security, Defence and Veterans Affairs for detailed study in early 2026. The proposed reforms include measures to strengthen border enforcement authorities and improve program oversight.
The Department of Health announced that a second cohort of internationally trained physicians is wrapping up the Practice Ready Assessment New Brunswick program this month. This initiative, supported by the Department of Health and offered through the College of Physicians and Surgeons of New Brunswick, provides an alternate route to licensure for doctors who earned their medical degrees outside of Canada, a demographic that already represents nearly one-third of the province’s physicians. Candidates must complete a 12-week clinical field assessment under supervision to evaluate their clinical skills and suitability for safe patient care. Successful participants sign a three-year return-of-service agreement and will transition into working as family doctors across several regions to improve primary care access. Following the successful completion of the inaugural 10-physician cohort in March 2025, the province plans to continue the program with additional cohorts scheduled for this fall and beyond.
The Honourable Patty Hajdu, Minister of Jobs and Families, announced targeted, time-limited measures to support rural employers facing acute labour shortages by allowing them to increase their reliance on the Temporary Foreign Worker (TFW) Program. At the request of provinces or territories, the government will permit rural employers in eligible regions to increase the allowable share of low-wage temporary foreign workers from 10% to 15% of their total workforce. These measures, which can be implemented within two weeks of a provincial request, are slated to begin as early as April 1, 2026, and will remain in effect until March 31, 2027. While previous tightening measures introduced between 2023 and 2024 aimed to reduce overall program reliance, these new adjustments recognize the unique challenges of rural economies with low unemployment rates and difficulties in recruiting local staff. Existing exemptions will remain for strategic sectors, such as health care, construction, and food processing, which maintain a 20% cap, while seasonal industries like tourism and seafood processing continue to benefit from cap exemptions.
IRCC has issued an operational update to streamline the guidance provided to staff regarding permanent resident travel documents (PRTDs) and residency status. As part of this reorganization, the manual OP 10 (Permanent Residency Status Determination) and the guidelines in OB 626 have been deleted or expired, with content on PR cards and PR status now separated into dedicated headlines to improve accessibility for officers. Notable changes include the introduction of a new letter template for notifying clients of appeal rights following a negative residency determination, as well as the removal of the “Consent to decision on residency obligation and waiver of appeal rights” form, which officers must no longer use. These updates are accompanied by new departmental policies and processing instructions specifically for PRTDs to ensure more efficient functional guidance.
Effective January 1, 2026, new Ministerial Instructions have introduced an intake pause for the Start-Up Business (SUV) and Federal Self-Employed Persons (SEP) classes to manage application backlogs and prioritization. For the SUV program, applications submitted before January 1, 2026, remain eligible for priority processing; however, the Centralized Intake Office (CIO) will officially stop accepting new applications on June 30, 2026, and any received outside these parameters will be returned with fees. Regarding the SEP program, the existing intake pause has been extended indefinitely, though IRCC will continue to process applications received before the initial April 30, 2024, pause. These updates ensure that departmental staff have clear functional guidance on managing existing inventories while the pauses remain in effect.
IRCC has released updated operational instructions regarding the temporary special measures for Iranian nationals in Canada for applications submitted on or after March 1, 2025. These updates provide essential clarifications on eligibility, specifically requiring that clients must have arrived in Canada on or before February 28, 2025, and remained in the country until their application was submitted. The revised guidance further clarifies temporary resident status requirements and confirms that clients may apply for the restoration of their status concurrently with an extension application under these crisis measures. Additionally, the update provides staff with guidance on utilizing the Entry/Exit Program, standardized refusal language for correspondence, and a reminder to use the correct organization ID to ensure accurate tracking of applications processed under this public policy.
IRCC has updated its operational instructions regarding bilateral agreements under the International Experience Canada (IEC) program and the International Mobility Program (IMP). This update introduces two new initiatives under the Young Professionals stream to facilitate reciprocity and international mobility. The new initiatives include Inov Contacto for participants from Portugal and the Taiwan Global Pathfinder Initiative (TGPI) for participants from Taiwan. These additions are reflected in the updated guidelines for staff managing bilateral arrangements and arrangements under section R204(d) of the Regulations.
IRCC has introduced new operational instructions to modernize and consolidate the procedures for assessing language and knowledge requirements for citizenship applicants. These updates provide comprehensive guidance for IRCC staff on managing citizenship knowledge testing, evaluating language evidence for citizenship grants, and conducting language and knowledge hearings. As part of this reorganization, the standalone instructions for “Citizenship knowledge testing” and “Language and knowledge hearings for adults” have been deleted and replaced by a unified section titled “Citizenship knowledge and language assessment: Tests and hearings”. This streamlined approach is intended to clarify the assessment process and functional guidance for officers processing adult citizenship applications.
In alignment with Budget 2025, the federal government is introducing new limits on how long economic immigrants can access federally funded settlement services to encourage earlier integration and ensure resources are available for those who need them most. While economic immigrants could previously access these services indefinitely until obtaining citizenship, the eligibility period for permanent residents in the economic class, including principal applicants, spouses, and dependents, will now be restricted. These changes will be phased in gradually: the eligibility window will be capped at 6 years after obtaining permanent residence starting April 1, 2026, and will further decrease to 5 years as of April 1, 2027. Despite these new time limits, the Settlement program remains a core initiative to help newcomers find employment, fill labour market gaps, and overcome integration barriers within their communities.
The Honourable Lena Metlege Diab, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, has appointed five directors to the Board of Directors of the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants for a two-year term starting March 7, 2026. Following a recruitment process launched in June 2025, two new members, Ms. France Houle and Mr. Marc Spector—were appointed, alongside the reappointment of current members Mr. Timothy D’Souza, Rev. Jennifer Henry, and Mr. Ben Rempel. The Board consists of nine directors in total, with five appointed by the Minister and four licensed consultants elected by their peers. Established in 2021 to operate at arm’s length from the government, the College regulates consultants to ensure newcomers receive quality advice and to support efforts in combating immigration fraud.
On behalf of the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, the Honourable Joël Lightbound announced a new temporary measure designed to help Quebec retain skilled workers who are transitioning to permanent residence. This initiative allows eligible workers to obtain an employer-specific work permit under the International Mobility Program, enabling them to continue working for their current employer for up to 12 additional months. This extension provides the Government of Quebec with the necessary time to review their eligibility for a Quebec Selection Certificate (CSQ). To be eligible, workers must have received an invitation from Quebec to submit a Demande de Sélection Permanente (DSP) and must hold (or have recently held) an employer-specific work permit expiring between March 13, 2026, and December 31, 2026. Applications for this measure will be open on the IRCC website until the end of 2026 and will benefit from expedited processing. This targeted action aligns with broader federal goals to stabilize the temporary resident population while supporting critical regional labour needs and facilitating the transition of up to 33,000 work permit holders to permanent residency over the next two years.
Issue: Whether it was reasonable for an officer to deny a permanent residence (PR) application based on a prior finding of misrepresentation.
Facts: The Applicant, a Kenyan citizen, married a Canadian and applied for PR under the Spousal Sponsorship Class. His application was refused because an officer had previously found, in respect of a prior Temporary Resident Visa (TRV) application, that he failed to disclose the use of a paid representative. This earlier finding triggered a five-year period of inadmissibility.
Court Findings: The Court held that the Applicant’s arguments amounted to a collateral attack on the January 2024 misrepresentation finding, which was not properly before the Court in the current application. The Officer had no jurisdiction to reconsider the prior finding.
Outcome: Application dismissed.
Why This Case is Important: It reinforces that an applicant cannot indirectly challenge a past final decision (and its consequences) through a subsequent application; they must seek judicial review of the original decision.
Issue: Whether a work permit refusal was reasonable where the applicant reused an old LMIA-exemption number.
Facts: After a prior refusal, the Applicant submitted a new application for a Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA)-exempt work permit but failed to provide a new fee or a new LMIA-exempt number (A#), instead relying on a number linked to the refused application.
Court Findings: IRCC Guidelines specify that an LMIA-exemption number is “matched to a specific work permit application” and cannot be reused. Furthermore, an officer is not required by procedural fairness to advise an applicant of shortcomings or missing statutory requirements in work permit applications.
Outcome: Application dismissed.
Why This Case is Important: It clarifies that for LMIA-exempt permits, a new offer of employment and fee must be submitted for every new application, and officers have minimal duty to notify applicants of such technical omissions.
Issue: Whether the refusal of a Self-Employed Class application was procedurally unfair due to an allegedly “incomplete” record.
Facts: The Applicant (Namibian) was denied for failing to show sufficient funds. She claimed she had submitted a second package of financial documents via the portal on March 31, 2024, but IRCC records showed the documents were not uploaded until April 23, 2024—the day after the decision was issued.
Court Findings: There is a presumption that tribunal records are complete. The Court preferred the “impartial evidence” of the Officer and the system logs over the Applicant’s “unreliable memory” and inconsistent affidavits.
Outcome: Application dismissed.
Why This Case is Important: It highlights the difficulty of rebutting the presumption of a complete record based on “bare assertions” of portal submission errors without technical evidence.
Issue: Whether a third consecutive TRV refusal was reasonable and justified an award of costs.
Facts: Indian citizens seeking to visit their children in Canada had their TRV denied for the third time. The Officer cited family ties in Canada as a reason for refusal but ignored “pull factors” like the Applicants’ business, employment, and elderly parents in India.
Court Findings: The decision was “clearly unreasonable” because it failed to weigh the evidence of ties to India. The Court noted the Applicants were trapped in a “carousel” of litigation.
Outcome: Application granted; costs of $1,000 awarded to the Applicants.
Why This Case is Important: It is a rare instance where the Court awarded costs against the Minister for “special reasons,” specifically criticizing the practice of issuing “identically deficient” reasons for decisions reconsidered after successful litigation.
Issue: Reasonableness of an inadmissibility finding for complicity in crimes against humanity.
Facts: The Applicant’s spouse served 30 years in the Chinese Public Security Bureau (PSB) in Hebei Province, eventually becoming a Vice Director. He was found inadmissible under s. 35(1)(a) of the IRPA based on reports of systematic torture during interrogations in Hebei.
Court Findings: The Court held that civilian detainees constitute a “distinctive civilian population” for crimes against humanity. Given the spouse’s high rank and length of service, it was reasonable to find him complicit in the systematic abuse, even without evidence linking him to a specific act.
Outcome: Application dismissed.
Why This Case is Important: It affirms that high-ranking officials in organizations where human rights violations are widespread can be found complicit based on their supervisory roles and the systematic nature of the crimes.
Issue: Interaction between Ministerial Instructions (refusal to process) and status restoration.
Facts: A caregiver’s work permit expired on October 12, 2024. She applied for a new permit and restoration of status within 90 days. IRCC refused to process the application based on Ministerial Instructions that prohibit processing new work permits for caregivers.
Court Findings: The decision was unreasonable because the Officer failed to explain how the request for restoration (under s. 182 of the Regulations) interacted with the restrictive Ministerial Instructions.
Outcome: Application granted.
Why This Case is Important: It establishes that officers must substantively engage with restoration requests when determining whether an application is barred by restrictive “refusal to process” instructions.
Issue: Whether the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) breached procedural fairness regarding DNA testing.
Facts: The Applicant sought to sponsor a son, but the IAD disbelieved the biological link and DNA evidence. The Applicant argued she had a “legitimate expectation” that the visa officer would order a new DNA test.
Court Findings: There is no statutory or policy requirement for DNA testing. The record did not show an “unqualified undertaking” to conduct such testing, and the Applicant failed to challenge the underlying negative credibility findings.
Outcome: Application dismissed.
Why This Case is Important: It clarifies that a “legitimate expectation” of a specific procedure (like DNA testing) only arises from a clear and unqualified promise, which was absent here.
Issue: Entitlement to mandamus for a deleted application and the validity of IRCC data retention policies.
Facts: The Applicant applied for citizenship in 2021; IRCC found it incomplete and deleted it after 60 days per policy when the Applicant didn’t respond. He applied again in 2022 but was refused for insufficient physical presence.
Court Findings: Mandamus (to force a decision on the 2021 app) was denied because an incomplete application is not an “application” in law and does not trigger a duty to act. IRCC’s 60-day deletion policy for incomplete online files is valid under the Privacy Act.
Outcome: Application dismissed.
Why This Case is Important: It validates IRCC’s automated deletion policy for incomplete online applications and confirms that applicants bear the burden of proving an application was “complete” to seek mandamus.
Issue: Reasonableness of an exclusion from the family class under s. 117(9)(d).
Facts: A Sponsor did not declare her partner when she landed in 2020. IRCC claimed they were in a conjugal relationship since 2018 based on shared rent and photos. The Applicant argued they were merely roommates at that time.
Court Findings: The Officer’s reasons were a “bald conclusion” that failed to address evidence that they had separate bedrooms, separate finances, and filed separate taxes in the U.S..
Outcome: Application granted.
Why This Case is Important: It emphasizes that “roommate” arrangements or early-stage dating do not automatically constitute a conjugal relationship; officers must address specific evidence to the contrary.
Issue: Reasonableness of a work permit refusal based on ties and experience.
Facts: An Indian IT professional was refused a permit because she had “no significant family ties” abroad and lacked experience (due to missing bank statements/ITRs).
Court Findings: The Officer ignored that the Applicant lived with her parents in India (a significant tie). The Officer also failed to explain why other evidence, like payslips and education, was insufficient to prove her IT experience.
Outcome: Application granted.
Why This Case is Important: It serves as a reminder that living at home with parents is prima facie evidence of family ties, and officers cannot issue “bare, unreasoned conclusions” that ignore the specifics of an applicant’s living situation.
The content of this bulletin is for informational purposes only, and is not intended to provide or be relied on as legal advice.
For comprehensive legal analysis or strategic case support, contact Greenberg Hameed PC.
in**@*************ed.com
Click on the blurred section to reveal the full email address.
Suite 2079 – 325 Front Street West, Toronto, ON, M5V 2Y1
Business hours
Monday to Friday: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Saturdays:
Sundays: Closed
View our full Privacy Policy.