One of the most troubling trends we are seeing in Canadian immigration today is inconsistent decision-making by officers at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC). These inconsistencies are not minor technical issues—they have real human consequences, separating families and forcing applicants into lengthy legal battles.
At Fateh Law Corporation, we routinely encounter cases where the same evidence is treated differently by different officers, with no reasonable explanation. A recent Super Visa matter clearly demonstrates why judicial intervention becomes necessary.
A Real Case: Same Family, Same Documents—Two Opposite Decisions
We recently filed two Super Visa applications for a mother and a father, supported by the same child in Canada.
✅ Mother’s Super Visa – Approved
The officer accepted:
- The child’s Notice of Assessment (NOA)
- Bank statements
- Employment letter
- Proof of meeting the Minimum Necessary Income (MNI) requirement
❌ Father’s Super Visa – Refused
A different officer reviewed:
- The same NOA
- The same bank statements
- The same employment letter
Yet, the officer concluded that the Minimum Necessary Income was not met.
This raises a fundamental question:
If the MNI was sufficient for the mother, how could it suddenly be insufficient for the father?
The Real Issue: Hidden Reasoning and Procedural Unfairness
Based on our legal analysis, we strongly believe that the true concern was the father’s past immigration history. However, instead of addressing that issue transparently or issuing a procedural fairness letter, the officer relied on the financial requirement as a pretext to refuse.
This is legally problematic for several reasons:
🔹Officers must give clear, intelligible reasons
🔹Applicants are entitled to procedural fairness
🔹If concerns exist, officers must request additional documents or clarification
🔹Identical evidence cannot reasonably lead to opposite conclusions
At a minimum, the officer was required to ask for further proof, not issue a refusal.
Why Inconsistent Decision-Making Is Dangerous
Inconsistent refusals:
- Undermine public confidence in the immigration system
- Create bias and unpredictability
- Make outcomes dependent on which officer reviews the file
- Turn lawful immigration into a lottery
These are not isolated incidents.
Even the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association (CILA) formally raised concerns about rising inconsistencies in IRCC decision-making in its December 9 letter, warning that such practices erode trust in the system.
When There Is No Remedy Left—The Federal Court of Canada
When IRCC refuses an application unreasonably or inconsistently, applicants are often left with only one effective remedy:
👉 Judicial Review before the Federal Court of Canada
In this case, our legal strategy is clear:
- We will place the mother’s approved Super Visa before the Court
- We will demonstrate that identical evidence was assessed differently
- We will argue that the refusal is unreasonable, biased, and procedurally unfair
The Federal Court exists precisely to correct these types of errors and to ensure IRCC decision-makers act within the law.
Why Hiring a Canadian Immigration Lawyer Matters
Many applicants try to fix refusals by:
- Reapplying blindly
- Submitting reconsideration requests without legal pressure
Unfortunately, IRCC is not obligated to reconsider. Without a legal strategy, refusals often repeat themselves.
At Fateh Law Corporation, we:
✔ Build applications with Federal Court litigation in mind
✔ Identify hidden refusal reasons officers do not openly state
✔ Use comparative evidence (like parallel approvals) to expose inconsistency
✔ Challenge wrongful refusals within strict court deadlines
✔ Hold IRCC accountable through judicial review
Inconsistent Decisions Are Not Just Unfair—They Are Unlawful
Canadian immigration law demands fairness, transparency, and consistency. When officers approve one application and refuse another on the same evidence, the decision does not withstand legal scrutiny.
If you or your family member has received a refusal that:
- Makes no logical sense
- Contradicts another approval
- Ignores the evidence you submitted
You may have strong grounds to challenge the decision in the Federal Court.
Contact Fateh Law Corporation
If you believe your refusal is wrongful, inconsistent, or unreasonable, do not give up.
📞 Contact Fateh Law Corporation to:
- Review your refusal reasons
- Assess Federal Court options
- Take decisive legal action against IRCC
Justice in immigration does not happen by chance—it happens through strong legal advocacy.
