Every case here represents a real person whose future was at stake. These are the outcomes we fought for — and won.
The following are cases argued by Amit Bansal before the Federal Court of Canada. Each citation represents a real client whose rights we defended.
Case titles and citations · Partial list
Partial list. All cases argued before the Federal Court of Canada. Case citations are a matter of public record. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Book a ConsultationA Canadian Experience Class application was refused after foreign work experience points were stripped, dropping the score below the selection threshold. We challenged the decision for procedural unfairness - IRCC agreed to settle and reopen the application.
A work permit was refused on misrepresentation grounds over educational documents, triggering a five-year inadmissibility ban despite a detailed fairness letter response. We built a strong good-faith record showing the full evidence demanded a fair assessment - IRCC settled, refusal set aside.
IRCC refused a CEC application by questioning genuine employment, overlooking consistent payroll records, bank statements, and employment letters from multiple independent sources. We filed a Judicial Review demonstrating the evidence had been ignored - case settled, refusal set aside.
After receiving an Invitation to Apply, an Express Entry application was refused when the officer stripped foreign work experience points using assumptions never communicated to the applicant. Federal Court filing led to settlement - application reopened by a different officer.
A Parent and Grandparent Super Visa was refused over financial capacity concerns, relying on broad statements without meaningfully analyzing the submitted evidence. Judicial Review led to settlement - refusal set aside, fresh consideration ordered.
An Express Entry application was refused when arranged employment points were denied over a lapsed work permit, despite a valid job offer and supporting documents. We challenged the legal framework applied - settlement reached, application reopened.
A work permit was refused and a five-year inadmissibility imposed for alleged misrepresentation, despite a thorough and timely fairness letter response. We organized a strong good-faith evidentiary record and argued the full evidence demanded a fair assessment - IRCC settled, refusal set aside.
A Parent and Grandparent Super Visa was refused because minimum necessary income was not sufficiently demonstrated, without considering the full financial picture including current employment and ongoing income. We argued the decision was flawed - settlement reached, application reopened by a different officer.
An Express Entry application was refused after the officer found Canadian work experience did not meet occupational criteria, reducing ranking points and leading to rejection. We presented detailed employment records showing consistent duties meeting requirements - IRCC agreed to settle, refusal set aside.
An in-Canada work permit extension was refused over employer genuineness concerns that were never communicated to the applicant, despite a valid LMIA and complete documentation. We argued the decision lacked transparency and denied fair process - IRCC settled, case reopened.
A CEC application was refused over occupational skills concerns, and a reconsideration request was dismissed without meaningful engagement with new material. Federal Court filing showed the real work experience met program requirements - case settled for fresh consideration.
Our client was refused at a Canadian port of entry and issued an exclusion order while attempting to renew a work permit to continue working legally. We immediately filed for Judicial Review and an emergency stay - the Federal Court granted the stay, and IRCC ultimately settled with the order set aside.
IRCC refused an LMIA-based work permit by importing a misrepresentation finding from a separate, already-closed PR application without giving the applicant any opportunity to explain. We challenged the unreasonable reliance on a closed file - both applications reopened without a hearing.
An overseas LMIA-based work permit was refused over doubts about job ability and likelihood of departure, without explaining why the submitted documents were insufficient. We challenged the fairness and reasoning in Federal Court - settlement reached, application reopened.
After a post-graduation work permit reconsideration was reopened and every document request fulfilled, the file sat pending for months with no decision, putting the applicant's status at serious risk. We prepared a mandamus application arguing unreasonable delay - IRCC settled and resumed the decision process.
A Temporary Foreign Worker application was refused based on undisclosed online information about the job offer, with no opportunity for the applicant or employer to respond before the decision. We argued the officer relied on untested concerns in a fundamentally unfair way - IRCC settled, refusal set aside.
A visitor visa was refused with generic, near-identical reasoning that failed to meaningfully address submitted evidence about family ties, travel purpose, and home country connections. Judicial Review demonstrated key documents were overlooked and reasoning lacked individualized analysis - settlement reached, different officer ordered.
An Express Entry application was refused after the officer deemed the job offer non-genuine, ignoring proof of ongoing employment, employer explanations, and valid government-approved work authorization. New credibility concerns raised in the refusal were never put to the applicant to address - IRCC settled, application reopened.
A spousal open work permit was refused when the officer applied updated eligibility rules retroactively to an application submitted before the new policy came into effect, while overlooking employment documentation. We challenged the wrong legal standard being applied - IRCC settled, refusal set aside.
A CEC permanent residence application was refused after the officer concluded there was no qualifying job offer, stripping key Express Entry points and dropping the application below the selection threshold. We filed a Judicial Review arguing the LMIA-based offer had to be assessed fairly and as a whole - IRCC settled, case reopened.
A Home Childcare Provider Pilot PR application was refused after work hours were calculated using a flawed method that fell short of the six-month minimum threshold. We filed a Judicial Review with employment records proving the required experience had been achieved - settlement reached, application reopened.
A family-based work permit was refused on eligibility, document sufficiency, and intent concerns without meaningful engagement with the submitted evidence. Judicial Review argued for proper legal framework application and a fair reassessment of the full file - IRCC settled, refusal set aside.
A post-graduation work permit was approved for only 20 months with no explanation - far below the standard period the completed program should have provided. We filed a Judicial Review showing the outcome did not align with program guidelines - IRCC issued a settlement letter, case reopened for a fair determination.
A post-graduation work permit was refused on study permit compliance grounds, creating serious status uncertainty and future immigration consequences. We demonstrated valid documentation was maintained throughout studies and key explanations were not meaningfully considered - IRCC settled, refusal set aside.
After an Invitation to Apply was issued, the Express Entry application was refused under s. 11.2 when foreign work experience was found to not meet occupational criteria, stripping points and cancelling the application. We filed a Judicial Review showing the evidence supported eligibility when properly assessed - IRCC settled, refusal set aside.
A temporary resident visa was refused on concerns about family ties, travel purpose, and financial capacity without properly considering the full circumstances and supporting materials submitted. Judicial Review presented a complete picture of the applicant's situation - IRCC settled, refusal set aside, fresh consideration ordered.
A study permit application was refused on misrepresentation grounds over doubts about an admission document's authenticity, triggering a five-year inadmissibility ban despite official confirmation from the educational institution. We filed a Federal Court Judicial Review on procedural fairness and improper evidence assessment - IRCC settled, case reopened.
No cases found for this filter.
Disclaimer: The case summaries presented on this page are based on real matters handled by Bansal Law. Details have been generalized to protect client confidentiality. Past results are not a guarantee of future outcomes. Every immigration matter is unique and depends on its own facts and applicable law. These summaries are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice.
Whether you're facing a refusal, a ban, a removal order, or an appeal — we fight for the outcome you deserve. Start with a free, confidential consultation.