Bee The VA March 22nd, 2026 Weekly Newsletter
Essential Insights:
CBSA Update
IRCC Updates
Express Entry Draws
PNP Draws
New Caselaws
Job Opportunities
Bee The VA Packages
CBSA Update:
CBSA expands efforts to disrupt extortion networks across Canada
The CBSA has intensified its efforts to combat extortion and organized crime by working closely with law enforcement partners across Canada, leading to a significant increase in immigration enforcement actions. Since expanding monitoring efforts in 2025, the agency has opened 372 investigations, issued 70 removal orders, and carried out 35 removals of individuals linked to extortion-related activities. Through joint task forces and public tips, the CBSA identifies individuals who may be inadmissible under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and takes action, including detention and deportation. Recent cases highlight the removal of individuals involved in organized criminal networks. Overall, the CBSA continues to strengthen enforcement capacity, increase removals, and enhance collaboration to protect public safety and prevent those involved in serious criminality from remaining in Canada. Read here.
CBSA human smuggling investigation leads to two-year prison sentence for U.S. citizen
A U.S. citizen, Sahil Aziz, was sentenced to a total of 34 months in prison after a CBSA investigation revealed his involvement in human smuggling and possession of fraudulently obtained credit card data. Arrested following a February 2025 attempt to enter Canada at the Emerson port of entry, officers discovered suspicious identity documents and items linked to another individual, leading to further investigation. Evidence obtained through a search warrant confirmed misrepresentation under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and a large volume of stolen financial data. Aziz pleaded guilty and received a two-year sentence for human smuggling, with additional time accounted for related offences, and has remained in custody since his arrest. Read here.
IRCC Updates:
Program delivery update: Occupational category-based selection in Express Entry
As of March 16, 2026, IRCC has updated its program delivery guidance to standardize occupational requirements for category-based selection (CBS) under Express Entry. This change aims to ensure greater consistency and alignment with evolving policy and legislative requirements, supporting more streamlined and predictable selection processes. Read here.
Program delivery update: Temporary Resident – Business visitors
As of March 19, 2026, IRCC has updated its program delivery instructions for temporary resident business visitors to include clearer eligibility criteria. This update provides additional guidance to officers and stakeholders, aiming to improve consistency and transparency in assessing who qualifies as a business visitor under Canada’s immigration framework. Read here.
Program delivery update: Public policy to facilitate work permits for prospective permanent residence candidates in Quebec
As of March 19, 2026, IRCC introduced new instructions under a temporary public policy aimed at supporting Quebec’s goal of transitioning more eligible temporary residents to permanent residency through its provincial programs. The policy proposes facilitating access to employer-specific work permits under the International Mobility Program for select temporary foreign workers, while also updating guidance related to LMIA exemption codes and broader temporary resident procedures. Read here.
Express Entry Draws:
March 16–18, 2026
This week, IRCC conducted three Express Entry draws, targeting a mix of candidates through program-specific and category-based selection. Here’s a clear breakdown:
March 16, 2026 – Provincial Nominee Program (PNP)
Invitations Issued: 362
CRS Cut-off Score: 742
This draw targeted candidates who had already received a provincial nomination, which significantly boosts CRS scores by 600 points. As a result, the cut-off remains consistently high in PNP rounds.
March 17, 2026 – Canadian Experience Class (CEC)
Invitations Issued: 4,000
CRS Cut-off Score: 507
The CEC draw focused on candidates with Canadian work experience, a key priority group for IRCC. The relatively moderate CRS score reflects a strong pool of candidates already integrated into the Canadian labour market.
March 18, 2026 – French-Language Proficiency (Category-Based)
Invitations Issued: 4,000
CRS Cut-off Score: 393
This category-based draw targeted candidates with strong French-language skills, resulting in a significantly lower CRS cut-off. This highlights IRCC’s continued push to support Francophone immigration outside Quebec.
Provincial Nominee Program (PNP) Draws – March 9–13, 2026
Alberta (AAIP) – March 16, 2026
Alberta conducted a targeted draw under the Express Entry Stream – Priority Sectors (Health Care), issuing 63 invitations to candidates with a minimum score of 50. This draw highlights Alberta’s continued focus on addressing shortages in the healthcare sector through targeted selection.
Ontario (OINP) – March 18, 2026
Ontario held a significant round of invitations across multiple streams, issuing a total of 1,243 invitations. The draw included invitations under the Masters Graduate and PhD Graduate streams, as well as targeted Employer Job Offer streams, reflecting Ontario’s ongoing efforts to retain international graduates and meet employer-driven labour demands.
Prince Edward Island (PEI PNP) – March 20, 2026
PEI conducted its regular draw, issuing 101 invitations under its Labour and Express Entry streams. The province continues to prioritize candidates working in key sectors such as healthcare, trades, and manufacturing.
New Caselaws:
WP- In Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 352, the Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a refused work permit restoration application, where the applicant argued the refusal resulted from his former representative’s incompetence. While acknowledging potential issues with the representative’s conduct, the Court focused on whether this caused a miscarriage of justice or prejudice. It found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that the outcome would likely have been different but for the alleged incompetence, particularly as there was no guarantee the work permit would have been approved. Additionally, the Court held that any requirement to leave Canada and reapply did not amount to sufficient prejudice. As a result, the application was dismissed. Read here.
Misrep-In Gabayan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 355, the Federal Court allowed the applicant’s judicial review applications after the Minister conceded that the original visitor visa refusal and related misrepresentation finding were unreasonable. The applicant, a Philippine citizen, had been found inadmissible for misrepresentation after concerns arose about the credibility of documents submitted with her visa application, resulting in a five-year bar from Canada. The Court set aside both the refusal and the reconsideration decision, ordered that the matter be sent back to a different officer for redetermination, and directed that the applicant be given a reasonable opportunity to provide additional information. The Court also awarded the applicant $1,500 in costs, not because she won the motion itself, but to sanction the respondent for making serious and unfounded allegations of misconduct against applicant’s counsel. Read here.
Inadmissibility- In Kesete v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 359, the Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a decision finding the applicant inadmissible to Canada for crimes against humanity under paragraph 35(1)(a) of the IRPA. The applicant, an Eritrean national forcibly conscripted at age 16, argued that the officer failed to properly apply the Ezokola test and overlooked the context of his child conscription, imprisonment, low rank, and limited role. However, the Court found the decision reasonable, concluding that the officer had considered the relevant factors and had reasonable grounds to believe the applicant knowingly and significantly contributed to torture carried out by the Eritrean army, based on his own statements about witnessing and understanding the abuse, his duties in camp security and logistics, and the surrounding country condition evidence. The Court also rejected procedural fairness arguments concerning the lack of a transcript and alleged interpretation problems, finding that the interview notes were sufficient and that the applicant had not objected to interpretation at the time. Read here.
H&C- In Mai v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 363, the Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review of a refused humanitarian and compassionate (H&C) application for permanent residence. The Court found the officer’s decision to be reasonable, concluding that although the applicant had family ties in Canada and a Canadian-born child, these factors did not amount to the exceptional circumstances required for H&C relief. The officer reasonably gave limited weight to the applicant’s establishment due to her lack of community involvement and long period (16 years) of unauthorized stay, and appropriately treated her immigration history as a significant negative factor rather than a mere technical breach. The best interests of the child were considered in a detailed and responsive manner, with the officer acknowledging potential impacts but finding viable alternatives, including remaining in Canada or relocating to Australia. The Court held that the officer properly assessed all factors individually and cumulatively, and emphasized that judicial review is not an opportunity to reweigh evidence, ultimately upholding the refusal. Read here.
RAD- In Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 368, the Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division redetermination that upheld the refusal of the applicant’s refugee claim. Although the RAD accepted that a medical certificate showed the applicant had sustained injuries in 2017 and that some injuries were consistent with torture, it found the document did not establish what caused those injuries or prove that he had been detained and tortured by Indian authorities because he was perceived as sympathetic to militants. The Court held that the RAD gave adequate reasons for assigning only limited weight to the medical evidence when considered alongside unchallenged credibility concerns and other inconsistencies in the record. Finding no reviewable error in the RAD’s reasoning, the Court concluded the decision was reasonable and dismissed the application. Read here.
RAD- In Rana v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC, the Federal Court granted a stay of removal for a Nepalese claimant pending determination of his late-filed judicial review of a negative Refugee Appeal Division decision. The Court found that the applicant met the three-part test for a stay, identifying a serious issue regarding whether the RAD improperly assessed corroborative evidence—specifically letters supporting his political activity—by dismissing them after making adverse credibility findings. The Court also accepted that the applicant could face irreparable harm if removed, given the risk tied to the disputed credibility findings, and concluded that the balance of convenience favoured granting the stay, particularly as the applicant would have otherwise benefited from an automatic stay had he filed on time. Read here.
PRRA- In Vittorazzi Vieira v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2026 FC, the Federal Court dismissed a motion for a stay of removal by a Brazilian family facing deportation, finding they failed to meet the first branch of the test by not raising a serious issue in their underlying judicial review. The Court held that the CBSA officer’s refusal to grant a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment was mandated by the clear statutory 12-month bar following the Federal Court’s prior refusal of leave, leaving no discretion to consider risk or the best interests of the children. The applicants’ arguments about language barriers in their earlier refugee proceedings were also rejected as irrelevant to the PRRA refusal under review. As no serious issue was established, the stay was denied without assessing the remaining factors.
IAD-In Rusakov v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 370, the Federal Court dismissed a judicial review challenging the Immigration Appeal Division’s conclusion that it lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the refusal of a spousal sponsorship application involving a prior misrepresentation finding. The applicant argued that because the later permanent residence application included humanitarian and compassionate considerations, the IAD should have had jurisdiction. However, the Court found the IAD’s interpretation of the IRPA reasonable, particularly its conclusion that the five-year bar in subsection 40(3) could not be bypassed simply by attaching an H&C request to the application. The Court held that the IAD reasonably distinguished conflicting case law, properly considered the statutory scheme and Parliament’s intent to strengthen the consequences of misrepresentation, and correctly recognized the difference between its limited H&C authority on appeal and the Minister’s broader discretionary H&C power under subsection 25(1). Read here.
SP-In Verma v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 371, the Federal Court upheld the refusal of a study permit extension, finding the decision reasonable. The officer concluded that the applicant had not complied with her study permit conditions, noting she failed to attend her original institution, provided insufficient evidence of studies for a significant period, and did not demonstrate a logical progression in her educational path. The applicant argued that the officer erred by failing to consider section 221 of the IRPR, which allows discretion to overcome certain non-compliance issues. However, the Court held that officers are not required to consider provisions not raised by the applicant, especially where the applicant maintained she was largely compliant and did not rely on section 221 in her submissions. The Court emphasized that applicants bear the burden of presenting their case, and the officer’s reasons were responsive and justified. The application for judicial review was dismissed. Read here.
RPD-In Elmuratov v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 372, the Federal Court allowed the judicial review, finding the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) decision unreasonable. The RAD had upheld the refusal of the applicant’s refugee claim largely due to credibility concerns and lack of corroborative evidence, particularly from the applicant’s wife regarding ongoing threats. While the RAD rejected new evidence and allegations of ineffective counsel, the Court held that it was unreasonable for the RAD to expect the applicant—who had limited education and no English proficiency—to understand that he could request to submit additional evidence after the RPD hearing. The RAD relied on this assumption without proper analysis or evidentiary support, which undermined its reasoning. As a result, the decision was set aside and returned to a differently constituted RAD panel for redetermination. Read here.
Events for Immigration Professionals:
NATIONAL CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION CONFERENCE- Mississauga, ON- May 27-29th
CBA Immigration Law Conference- May 28th to 30th, 2026
Job Opportunities:
RCIC- Borderpass- Compensation not stated- Quebec
Vitti Immigration Law- $75,000 to $100,000 CAD- Remote
International Student Advisor- University Canada West- $60,000 to $70,000 CAD- Vancouver, BC
International Student Advisor- UBC-$7,283.75 - $10,474.08 CAD Monthly
Updates with Bee The Va:
At Bee the VA, we continue to support immigration lawyers and consultants by taking on the administrative workload that slows firms down.
With the recent increase in Federal Court decisions and litigation-heavy files, we’re seeing more firms needing reliable support with document preparation, file organization, and deadline management. From refugee claims to PRRA and judicial review matters, our team is here to ensure your back-end operations run smoothly and efficiently.
This week, we’re especially highlighting our Word document preparation services — helping you produce clean, court-ready submissions, affidavits, and appeal materials that reflect the professionalism of your practice.
If your firm is growing but your systems aren’t keeping up, Bee the VA helps you scale without the stress.
🔗 Learn more: https://www.beetheva.com/📧 Email us: info@beetheva.com
