Immigration case outcomes

Reported Federal Court decisions in which the firm acted, each one checkable by its citation, and client accounts of matters that never reached a courtroom.

Reported decisions

What the Federal Court has said

7 allowed of 22 reported decisions since 2023

The 7 are below. The rest were dismissed. Counsel of record on each is Kapilkumar P. Rathod, and every entry can be checked by its citation on the Federal Court's decisions site.

22 January 2026
Sharifi v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
Super visa, parents and grandparents
Challenge
A couple applied for a super visa to visit their son and four grandchildren in Canada. A first refusal was sent back for redetermination after the Minister accepted it was unreasonable, and the second refusal was challenged again.
Outcome
The Court found it illogical to treat the fact that the applicants' children live in Canada as a ground for refusing a parent and grandparent super visa.
2026 FC 99 · Docket IMM-23381-24 · Sadrehashemi J.Application allowed
23 January 2026
Sing v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
Work permit, Temporary Foreign Worker Program
Challenge
A work permit for a construction electrical helper was refused. The officer was not satisfied the applicant could perform the work or would leave at the end of his stay.
Outcome
The Court held the reasons did not allow it to understand the basis for the officer's conclusions, and set the decision aside.
2026 FC 105 · Docket IMM-18690-24Application allowed
2026
Rehman v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
Temporary resident visa
Challenge
A visa to sit the Sprinkler Fitter examination, taken in order to qualify for the Federal Skilled Trades programme, was refused. The application was decided on written representations rather than at a hearing.
Outcome
The Court found the officer had not engaged with the applicant's actual purpose in travelling.
2026 FC 805 · Docket IMM-20802-24 · Grant J.Application allowed
12 February 2025
Goel v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
Permanent residence, Express Entry
Challenge
An Express Entry application was rejected as incomplete because a marriage licence had been filed instead of a marriage certificate. IRCC then refused to reopen it, and confirmed that refusal on reconsideration.
Outcome
The Court held the refusal to reopen was justiciable and set it aside.
2025 FC 275 · Docket IMM-1797-24 · Turley J.Application allowed
29 November 2024
Sharma v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
Work permit, job offer
Challenge
A work permit was refused to an applicant from India holding an offer as a kitchen helper under National Occupational Classification 6711 at a restaurant in Surrey, British Columbia.
Outcome
The application for judicial review was allowed and the refusal sent back for redetermination.
2024 FC 1928 · Docket IMM-6445-23 · Fothergill J.Application allowed
23 September 2024
Tandel v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
Study permit
Challenge
A dentist practising in India since 2013 was refused a study permit for a post-graduate certificate in Health Care Administration and Service Management at Conestoga College.
Outcome
The Court found she had given a detailed explanation of how the programme served her plan to open dental clinics, which the officer had not grappled with.
2024 FC 1487 · Docket IMM-3700-23Application allowed
16 September 2024
Gill v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
Temporary resident visa
Challenge
A visitor visa was refused to an applicant travelling to attend his sister's wedding, on the ground that he had not established he would leave Canada at the end of his stay.
Outcome
The Court held the decision lacked justification and was therefore unreasonable.
2024 FC 1453 · Docket IMM-10337-23 · Grant J.Application allowed

How to read this page

Why quotations rather than write ups?

Because a firm describing its own results is exactly what the Law Society of Ontario treats carefully, and rightly. A decision carries a citation. A client account carries a name on a profile anyone can open. Both can be checked. A summary we wrote about ourselves cannot.

Nothing below has been edited, paraphrased or shortened.

Decisions allowed

Of 22 reported since 2023. The rest were dismissed and are listed above.

291

Reviews on Google

The whole profile, not a selection, and it includes the critical ones.

One star reviews

Left where clients wrote them. A firm with none has usually hidden them.

2019

Federal Court since

Judicial review and mandamus run by the lawyer rather than referred out.

Case outcomes

What the work actually looks like

6 client accounts, quoted in full

Each names the matter and the route taken through it, then hands over to the client's own words. Nothing has been paraphrased. Every one is still on the public Google profile alongside the 18 that are not complimentary.

Federal Court judicial review

Spousal open work permit

Two refusals through consultants, then leave and judicial review at the Federal Court. IRCC approved after the application was filed.

I had a very grateful experience with kapil Rathod, Actually i applied two times SOWP for my wife through RCIC consultants but got refused for both times without any specific reason then one of my family friend suggest me to discuss the case with the Kapil sir, after discussion they gave me the option for judicial Review and we file the case in Federal Court for judicial review, it took 2-3 months and then i got approval from IRCC with the help of kapil Sir.I recommended to everybody, if anybody has any issues regarding immigration then try to contact with Rathod Law FirmThanks

Google

Gurpreet SinghQuoted unedited from the firm's public Google profile, August 2025

Federal Court judicial review

Permanent residence

A refused permanent residence application challenged on the reasonableness of the officer's decision rather than reargued on its merits.

I am very thankful for the excellent legal representation I received during the judicial review of my PR refusal. Rathod law firm demonstrated deep knowledge of immigration law, prepared strong legal arguments, and handled the case with professionalism and precision. Their clear communication and strategic approach gave me confidence throughout a very complex process. I highly recommend their services to anyone facing a PR refusal or judicial review.

Google

Ashu BediQuoted unedited from the firm's public Google profile, February 2026

Fresh application after refusal

Spousal sponsorship

Two refusals before the file came to the firm. Rebuilt as a fresh application rather than taken to court.

I am extremely grateful to Rathod Law Firm for their outstanding support with my spouse visa application. After facing two refusals, I was feeling very stressed and uncertain about the process. However, their team handled my case with professionalism, patience, and deep knowledge of immigration laws.With their excellent guidance, strong documentation preparation, and the right suggestions at every step, I finally received my spouse visa approval within 17 days. Their expertise truly made the difference.I highly recommend Rathod Law Firm to anyone facing visa challenges. Thank you to the entire team for your dedication and hard work!

Google

Chaitali SoniQuoted unedited from the firm's public Google profile, February 2026

Fresh application after refusal

Study permit

A study permit refused once, then reapplied with the study plan and the ties evidence addressed directly.

Kapil’s team handled my sister’s study permit application with great thoroughness and attention to detail. Her visa was denied once last year, but with the guidance of Kapil and his team, she reapplied in December and her application was approved. We are extremely happy and grateful for their support. Thank you, Kapil and your team. Highly recommended.P.S. This was a study permit application for my sister in Vietnam.

Google

phuong nguyenQuoted unedited from the firm's public Google profile, January 2026

Federal Court judicial review

Visitor visa

A family's visitor visa refusals taken to the Federal Court of Canada, and approved after the court process.

I heartily thank Mr. Kapil and his Team for making my Canadian dream true. My family’s and mine visitor visa applications to Canada were refused. Mr. Rathod helped us in filing a Judicial Review at the Federal Court of Canada and based on this Federal Court Appeal, we got approval today. Highly recommended.

Google

mandeep goyalQuoted unedited from the firm's public Google profile, July 2024

Employer supported application

LMIA and work permit

A Labour Market Impact Assessment run with the employer, with the documentation coordinated through their office.

Kapil and his team worked very well throughout my LMIA application process and delivered all the anticipated results. They patiently answered all my questions and also perfectly coordinated with my office regarding all the documentation. Special thanks to Kapil, Hiral, Salima, and Dipen, as well as the other team members whose efforts I greatly appreciate. Highly recommended !

Google

Bhushan MaratheQuoted unedited from the firm's public Google profile, February 2025

Every outcome here turned on the facts of that file and on decisions made by an officer or a judge. Nothing here predicts what will happen on yours, and no lawyer can promise a result that somebody else decides.

Where to go next