Background
Hiren Jagdishbhai Chhatrala, an Indian citizen, applied for a work permit under the Start-Up Visa Program. He proposed to serve as chief executive officer of Misobo Wellness Inc., a business developing a wellness app connected to a wearable armband.
An immigration officer refused the application because Chhatrala had not provided sufficient evidence that he could perform the proposed CEO role. Chhatrala sought judicial review, arguing that the officer overlooked evidence of his qualifications and experience and failed to give proper effect to a designated organization’s Commitment Certificate. After discovering that Chhatrala had not been properly served with a rescheduling order, the Court invited objections to written disposition; the respondent did not object, and Chhatrala did not respond, so the Court decided the application on the written record.
The Court’s Holding
The Federal Court dismissed the application. It held that the officer reasonably concluded that Chhatrala had not sufficiently demonstrated his ability to perform the proposed work. Under section 200 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, the applicant bore the burden of supplying enough evidence to establish that competence.
The Commitment Certificate did not require the officer to accept that Chhatrala was qualified and did not displace the officer’s independent discretion under paragraph 200(3)(a). Neither that certificate nor a former employer’s support letter actually assessed his ability to serve as Misobo’s CEO. The officer also reasonably found the employment evidence insufficient because Chhatrala supplied no appointment letter, employment contract, pay records, salary-deposit statements, or documentation substantiating his claimed freelance consulting work. IRCC was not obliged to contact his references to fill those evidentiary gaps.
Chhatrala’s arguments ultimately asked the Court to reweigh the evidence, which is not its role on reasonableness review. The Court found no question of general importance to certify.
Key Takeaways
- A Start-Up Visa Commitment Certificate does not conclusively establish that an applicant can perform the work underlying a work-permit application.
- Applicants bear the burden of documenting their qualifications and work history; reference letters may be insufficient without corroborating employment or financial records.
- On reasonableness review, the Federal Court will not reweigh evidence merely because another assessment was possible.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that endorsement by a designated Start-Up Visa organization does not replace IRCC’s separate assessment under section 200 of the Regulations. Founders seeking preliminary work authorization must substantiate their individual ability to perform the proposed role.
It also underscores the practical importance of submitting comprehensive supporting records with the original application. Officers generally need not investigate references or obtain evidence that an applicant could have supplied.