Procedural Fairness Letter 

Why is a Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL) issued?

​

Applicants have the right to a decision that is fair and impartial. The courts have stated that even the possibility or perception of bias must be avoided. 

​

When a decision affects an individual, that individual has the right to know the facts of the case and must be given a fair chance to respond.

The "right to be heard" requires that the applicant be informed of significant facts that are likely to affect the application's outcome. For example, if a decision-maker relies on extrinsic evidence (evidence obtained from sources other than the applicant), the applicant must be informed and given an opportunity to respond to such evidence.

​

To ensure that the applicant has a meaningful opportunity to participate, decision-makers must provide adequate notice of any process or interview that may result in a decision on their application, as well as a reasonable opportunity for the applicant to bring evidence or make arguments in support of their application. Decision-makers should inform applicants about any documents that may be required to address concerns. Interview invitation letters should include enough information to allow applicants to prepare. If any additional concerns arise during an interview, decision-makers should give the applicant an opportunity to address those concerns, either during the interview or afterward, via a procedural fairness letter.

​

The right to be heard does not always imply the right to an interview, though in some cases, an interview may be the best way to proceed. If an applicant is interviewed, he or she should be allowed to bring an interpreter or, in some cases, should be provided with one.

​

A Procedural Fairness Letter - PFL is issued so that the applicants: 

​

• receive a fair and unbiased evaluation of their application

• are made aware of the concerns that the assessing officer has;

• are given a meaningful opportunity to respond to concerns about their application

​

Here are some examples of why a procedural fairness letter may be issued

​

• Spousal Sponsorship - Genuineness of relationship or marriage of convenience under subsection 12(1) and subsection 4(1)

One of the most common reasons a couple may receive a PFL is when an assessing officer is not certain whether the couple meets the eligibility requirements of the spousal sponsorship application for a spouse, common-law partner or a conjugal partner. 

 

For example, your marriage is not recognized in Canada. You did not declare your or your partners' dependents on the application. You did not provide substantial proof of relationship. Another reason could be that you are presently not living inside Canada and have stated otherwise when applying for an inland spousal sponsorship. A major factor that contributes to receiving a PFL is the fact that you and your partner have not submitted enough proof of trying to cohabit if you are in a conjugal relationship and have applied for outland sponsorship.

 

• Misrepresentation - subsection 40(1) of IRPA

​

40 (1) A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible for misrepresentation

(a) for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts relating to a relevant matter that induces or could induce an error in the administration of this Act;

(b) for being or having been sponsored by a person who is determined to be inadmissible for misrepresentation;

(c) on a final determination to vacate a decision to allow their claim for refugee protection or application for protection; or

(d) on ceasing to be a citizen under

(i) paragraph 10(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act, as it read immediately before the coming into force of section 8 of the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, in the circumstances set out in subsection 10(2) of the Citizenship Act, as it read immediately before that coming into force,

(ii) subsection 10(1) of the Citizenship Act, in the circumstances set out in section 10.2 of that Act, or

(iii) subsection 10.1(3) of the Citizenship Act, in the circumstances set out in section 10.2 of that Act.

Application

(2) The following provisions govern subsection (1):

(a) the permanent resident or the foreign national continues to be inadmissible for misrepresentation for a period of five years following, in the case of a determination outside Canada, a final determination of inadmissibility under subsection (1) or, in the case of a determination in Canada, the date the removal order is enforced; and

(b) paragraph (1)(b) does not apply unless the Minister is satisfied that the facts of the case justify the inadmissibility.

 

Section 40 applies to the following immigration applications whether they are made abroad, at a port of entry or from within Canada:

• Applications for permanent residence

• Applications for visas for permanent resident status

• Applications for temporary residence

• Applications for work and study permits, and for

• Renewals and extensions of status

​

Under subsection 40(1) of IRPA, if IRCC believes the applicant was not accurate in their application, they may decide the applicant misrepresented themselves. This might happen if someone purposefully (or unintentionally) put inaccurate information on the forms or fake documents. Inadmissibility for Misrepresentation and a 5-year ban from Canada may occur from a simple failure to declare a prior visa refusal for the USA, Australia, or another nation on an application. When evaluating an application, IRCC occasionally errs on the side of caution. To avoid the application being rejected and being barred from Canada, this issue must be stated sufficiently.

​

• Medical Inadmissibility - If IRCC determines that a person's medical condition will result in a disproportionate demand for health care or social service costs that exceed $20,517 CAD annually, the person may be deemed medically inadmissible to Canada. Due to the age of the elderly parents, this occurs frequently on applications for parental sponsorship and occasionally on other petitions for permanent residence. The Procedural Fairness Letter requires a proper response, as well as a secondary opinion or diagnoses, a medical plan, and other supporting documentation.

​

• Criminal Inadmissibility - An applicant may be found to be criminally inadmissible to Canada if they have a criminal history from Canada or another country. This can prevent them (and other family members included in the application) from obtaining permanent resident status or a temporary resident visa, and the application may be rejected. People frequently are unaware that if one non-accompanying family member (such as a husband) has a medical or criminal concern, it could hinder the complete family (the other spouse and children) from acquiring permanent residence.

​

• Express Entry or Skilled Immigration - IRCC may issue a PFL for an Express Entry application for a variety of reasons. Most problems stem from inadequate documentation of work experience (using the wrong NOC, employment letter not listing duties). Other explanations could be due to medical conditions, criminal activity, fabrications, or problems with dependents on the application (proving the relationship of spouse or children).