PGWP refused over a non-credit or public-private partnership program: your options and the 15-day deadline

By Pardeep S. Grewal, lawyer at Lawgical Law Corporation · Reviewed November 10, 2026

Published November 10, 2026

Pardeep S. Grewal is a lawyer at Lawgical Law Corporation, called to the BC bar in 2024, and a member of the Law Society of British Columbia.

Updated November 10, 2026: IRCC’s PGWP eligibility page (modified June 24, 2026), the restoration instructions and section 182 of the Regulations checked that day.

If IRCC refused your post-graduation work permit because the officer decided your college program was “non-credit” or was delivered by a private college under a public-private partnership, the fix is usually judicial review in the Federal Court. The application must be filed within 15 days of being notified of the refusal, and only a lawyer can represent you there. If your study permit has expired, your status is also at risk, and the 90-day restoration window runs at the same time. This guide covers the non-credit and partnership refusals that followed IRCC’s June 24, 2026 web update; I also review PGWP refusals for full-time status, language tests and field of study.

Lawgical Law Corporation, an immigration law firm in Surrey, Abbotsford and Vancouver, BC, challenges PGWP refusals in the Federal Court for graduates across Canada; this guide is by Pardeep S. Grewal.

Book a consultation about your PGWP refusal TapClick to open a short form. Our team will contact you to arrange a time.Short form, 4 quick fields Open form

What does a non-credit PGWP refusal say?

In these refusals the officer usually accepts that you studied, finished the program and applied on time. What the officer rejects is the program itself: either it did not lead to a credential through a credit-earning path, or it was taught by a private college on behalf of a public one after the partnership cut-off. The refusal does not say you did anything wrong. It says the program was never one that leads to a PGWP.

The officer’s notes usually track IRCC’s eligibility page, so expect the refusal to repeat its lines:

• “completed a non-credit program of study”
• “completed a course or program of study at a DLI that is not PGWP-eligible”
• “These programs are not PGWP-eligible in most cases”

Other wording from PGWP refusals in our files:

• “As you do not meet this requirement, it has been determined that you are not eligible for a work permit”
• “Application refused as per R205(c)(ii)”
• “Application refused, advised of restoration”

In other words, the officer says your program could never lead to a PGWP, so the refusal is about the college’s program, not about you. That is also why many graduates of the same program received the same letter.

Why this refusal needs a lawyer

One lawyer, one file, every step:

• reviewing the refusal, the officer’s notes and what your college told you;
• filing the judicial review within 15 days;
• arguing it in the Federal Court;
• protecting your status at the same time: restoration, a visitor record, or another permit.

A refusal like this turns on how IRCC reads its own policy and whether it was fair to apply a June 2026 “clarification” to students who enrolled and paid years earlier. That is administrative law, argued from the officer’s reasons and the record.

Immigration lawyers are members of a provincial law society (in our case, the Law Society of British Columbia), and only lawyers can appear for you in the Federal Court.

Reconsideration is often suggested by people who cannot represent you in the Federal Court. It is discretionary, it rarely changes the result, and it does not stop the 15-day deadline.

What are my options after a non-credit PGWP refusal?

1. Have a lawyer review the refusal and the officer’s notes. Check what program the officer thought you took, and compare it with your transcript and your college’s letters.
2. Judicial review in the Federal Court. 15 days from notice of the refusal if you are in Canada (60 days if outside). A judge can send the application back to a different officer.
3. Protect your status. If you applied before your study permit expired, you had maintained status until the refusal. After a refusal, you have 90 days to apply for restoration, as a student, worker or visitor, and you cannot work while it is pending.
4. Another route to work. An LMIA-based work permit, a spousal open work permit if your partner qualifies, or a new eligible program. Our guide to work permits now that flagpoling has ended covers how to apply from inside Canada.
5. Reconsideration request. Discretionary, rarely changes the result and does not stop the court deadline.

The court deadline does not wait for the other options.

Could the refusal be challenged in court?

The strongest argument, in my view, is about fairness to students who enrolled before IRCC changed its web guidance. IRCC says nothing changed on June 24, 2026, and that the update only spelled out an existing rule. But students in these programs say their college gave them written assurances, and some graduates of similar programs received PGWPs earlier in 2026. When an officer applies a rule in a way that was not clear from the published guidance at the time you enrolled, the reasons need to deal with that.

The second argument is about the facts. “Non-credit” is not defined in the Regulations, and colleges describe their programs in different ways. If your transcript shows credits, a credential and a credit-earning path, an officer who calls it non-credit without explaining why has not engaged with the evidence.

The third argument applies to partnership programs. IRCC’s page has two dates: programs started on or before May 15, 2024 in the same province, and on or before January 31, 2023 across provinces. An officer who uses the wrong date, or the wrong start date for your program, has made an error a court can correct.

Under Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65, a decision must be justified by the facts and the law in front of the officer, and the reasons must respond to the applicant’s central arguments.

Whether any of this fits your case depends on your program, your start date and what your college told you. As of November 10, 2026, the Federal Court has not published a decision on these non-credit refusals.

What do the PGWP rules require?

IRCC’s PGWP eligibility page (modified June 24, 2026) says you are not eligible if you “completed a non-credit program of study (except for a flight school program)”. For curriculum licensing agreements, where a private college delivers a public college’s program, it says “These programs are not PGWP-eligible in most cases.”

The exceptions are by start date: a program in the same province started on or before May 15, 2024, or a program across provinces started on or before January 31, 2023. The PGWP itself is issued under paragraph 205(c)(ii) of the Regulations, so the eligibility rules are IRCC policy, not wording in the Regulations.

Which programs lead to a PGWP?

How is this different from the TRP case after a PGWP refusal?

In Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 1095, a Sheridan College graduate whose PGWP was refused for not keeping full-time status asked for a temporary resident permit and an open work permit instead. The officer refused, and the Federal Court upheld that decision: a TRP needs a “compelling reason” to stay, and she had not shown she lacked other options, such as applying from abroad.

A non-credit refusal is in a different position:

• You did nothing wrong as a student. The refusal is about how your program was classified, not about your conduct.
• The rule was spelled out after you enrolled. The June 24, 2026 update is the centre of the argument, and it is something an officer’s reasons should address.
• The court route attacks the refusal itself. A TRP asks for an exception; judicial review says the refusal was wrong.

Kaur shows that a TRP is a hard road after a PGWP refusal. It is a fallback, not a replacement for challenging the refusal within 15 days.

Refused for a different PGWP reason?

I also review PGWP refusals for part-time study in a session, missing language test results, field of study for students who applied after November 1, 2024, distance learning and applications made too late. Our PGWP refusal guide covers those, and our guide to what happens if CBSA contacts you after a PGWP refusal covers the enforcement side.

Worked example: the two clocks

Example. A graduate’s study permit expired on June 30, 2026. She applied for a PGWP on June 20, so she had maintained status. IRCC refused on September 14, 2026, and she read the letter the same day. The court deadline is 15 days from notice: September 29, 2026. Her status ended with the refusal, so the 90-day restoration window runs from September 14 to December 13, 2026. She cannot work from September 14 until her status is restored and a new permit is issued.

What to gather for your lawyer

• The refusal letter and the officer’s notes (ask for the decision notes or GCMS notes).
• Your college documents: letter of acceptance, transcript showing credits, the credential, and any written statement that the program was PGWP-eligible.
• Dates: program start date, completion date, study permit expiry, the date you applied and the date you read the refusal.
• Your status history: every study permit, and any other application still pending.

Mistakes I have seen

• I have seen graduates spend their 15 days on a reconsideration request and then find the court deadline gone.
• I have seen people keep working after the refusal because they thought maintained status continued. It ends with the refusal.
• I have seen people wait for the outcome of a protest or a news story before acting on their own file.
• I have seen restoration applications filed as a worker when the person had no job offer or permit to restore to, instead of as a visitor.

Frequently asked questions

Did IRCC change the PGWP rules on June 24, 2026?

IRCC says no: it says the web update only clarified that non-credit programs were never eligible. Graduates and their college say earlier guidance was not clear, and that difference is at the centre of these refusals.

Can I stay in Canada after a PGWP refusal?

If your study permit expired before the refusal, you lost status on the refusal date. You have 90 days to apply to restore it, and you cannot work or study until it is restored.

Will a judicial review let me keep working?

No. Filing a judicial review does not give you status or permission to work. Your status depends on restoration or another permit.

How do I know if my program was a public-private partnership?

Check whether a private college delivered the program on behalf of a public college, and look at your letter of acceptance and transcript. IRCC’s eligibility page lists the dates that matter.

Can I get a refund from my college?

That is a separate question about your contract with the college and is not covered here. A lawyer can tell you whether the college’s written assurances help your immigration case.

Does this affect students in BC?

Yes. The rule is national, so it applies to programs delivered in BC the same way, including public college programs taught by a private partner.

What should I do right now?

Note the date you were notified of the refusal, and gather the letter, the officer’s notes, your transcript and anything your college gave you in writing about PGWP eligibility. Check your status: if it ended with the refusal, stop working and plan the restoration application now. Fifteen days passes fast.

Book a consultation with our immigration lawyers in Surrey, Abbotsford or Vancouver, or online from anywhere in Canada.

Ready to book? Open the booking form ↑

Sources (official)

• IRCC, Post-graduation work permit: who can apply (modified June 24, 2026)
• IRCC, Restoration of temporary resident status (modified May 1, 2026)
• Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, s. 182 (current to September 21, 2026) and s. 205
• Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 72
• Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 1095
• Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65

This article is general information, not legal advice. Every case depends on its own facts.