{"id":2039,"date":"2026-11-10T17:49:54","date_gmt":"2026-11-10T17:49:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lawgicalcorp.com\/blog\/misrepresentation-undisclosed-visa-refusal\/"},"modified":"2026-11-11T20:49:52","modified_gmt":"2026-11-11T20:49:52","slug":"misrepresentation-undisclosed-visa-refusal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lawgicalcorp.com\/blog\/misrepresentation-undisclosed-visa-refusal\/","title":{"rendered":"Misrepresentation for not disclosing a previous visa refusal: your options and the 15- or 60-day deadline"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Sundeep S. Grewal<\/a>, lawyer at Lawgical Law Corporation \u00b7 Reviewed November 10, 2026<\/em><\/p>\n

Sundeep S. Grewal is a lawyer at Lawgical Law Corporation, called to the BC bar in 2018, and a member of the Law Society of British Columbia<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

The fix:<\/strong> a careful answer to the procedural fairness letter before the decision, and judicial review in the Federal Court if you are found inadmissible. A judge can set aside a misrepresentation finding and the 5-year ban that comes with it.<\/p>\n

The deadline:<\/strong> the date in the fairness letter for your answer. After the decision, 15 days from notice if you are in Canada, 60 days if outside (IRPA s.72<\/a>). Reconsideration does not stop this clock.<\/p>\n

Why a lawyer:<\/strong> only a lawyer can take this to the Federal Court, and the fairness letter answer becomes the record the court reads. Why a lawyer<\/a><\/p>\n

Book a consultation<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The lawyers who review these refusals<\/p>\n

\"SundeepSundeep S. Grewal<\/span>Barrister and Solicitor<\/span><\/a>\"PrabhpreetPrabhpreet Kaur Sangha<\/span>Barrister and Solicitor<\/span><\/a>\"PardeepPardeep S. Grewal<\/span>Barrister and Solicitor<\/span><\/a><\/div>\n
\nAbout our lawyers<\/summary>\n
\n

Sundeep S. Grewal<\/a><\/strong> founded Lawgical Law Corporation and argues immigration cases at the Immigration and Refugee Board and the Federal Court of Canada.<\/p>\n

Prabhpreet Kaur Sangha<\/a><\/strong> focuses on refugee claims, immigration appeals, inadmissibility, detention reviews and Federal Court cases, and has presented at Continuing Legal Education seminars and the National Immigration Conference.<\/p>\n

Pardeep S. Grewal<\/a><\/strong> is an immigration and estates lawyer known for clear communication and practical strategy.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<\/div>\n

If IRCC sent you a procedural fairness letter, or refused your application and banned you for five years, because you answered “no” to the question about previous visa refusals when you had been refused by the US, the UK or Canada before, the fix depends on the stage. Before a decision, a written answer can explain the omission and why it did not matter. After a decision, the remedy is judicial review<\/a> in the Federal Court within 15 days if you are in Canada or 60 days if you are outside. Only a lawyer can represent you there. This guide uses an undisclosed US refusal as the example, but I also review misrepresentation findings over UK, Schengen, Australian and earlier Canadian refusals.<\/p>\n

Lawgical Law Corporation<\/a>, an immigration law firm in Surrey, Abbotsford and Vancouver, BC, answers misrepresentation letters and challenges misrepresentation findings in the Federal Court for applicants in Canada and abroad; this guide is by Sundeep S. Grewal.<\/p>\n

What does a misrepresentation finding under section 40(1)(a) say?<\/h2>\n

In these files the officer has found a refusal you did not list, usually through information sharing with the US, UK, Australia or New Zealand, or in IRCC’s own records. The officer accepts that you may not have meant to hide it. What the officer says is that the form asked a clear question, your answer was wrong, and a wrong answer to a background question is serious enough to make you inadmissible for five years.<\/p>\n

You will often see phrases like these in the fairness letter and the decision:<\/p>\n