If you took time away from your studies in Canada and are now worried about how it may affect your Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP), you are not alone.

Leave-of-absence issues are a common problem we see in PGWP applications. Many students only discover the 150-day rule after the leave has already happened, sometimes months or even years later when they begin preparing their PGWP application.

The difficult part is that there are several separate issues that often get mixed together:

• whether your school authorized the leave;
• whether you remained compliant with the conditions of your study permit;
• whether the leave affects your PGWP eligibility; and
• whether any period of non-compliance creates additional restrictions on obtaining a work permit.

A leave longer than 150 days can be a serious issue, but it should not automatically be assumed that every case will have the same outcome.

This guide explains how the 150-day rule works, what the law actually says, how IRCC assesses these cases, and what may happen if your leave exceeded the limit.

What Counts as an Authorized Leave?

IRCC recognizes that international students may sometimes need to temporarily stop studying.

According to IRCC’s current study-permit guidance, a student may be able to take an authorized leave of up to a maximum of 150 days and continue to be considered actively pursuing their studies.

The leave must be authorized by the student’s designated learning institution (DLI), and the student must be able to provide proof of that authorization if IRCC asks for it.

IRCC lists examples such as:

• medical reasons or pregnancy;
• a family emergency;
• the death or serious illness of a family member;
• a school closure;
• certain situations involving changing schools or deferred enrolment; and
• any other type of leave the school authorizes.

Importantly, IRCC does not restrict authorized leave to a short list of specific reasons. The central question is whether the DLI actually authorized the leave and whether the period falls within IRCC’s rules.

There is also an important difference between what your school may authorize academically and what IRCC considers acceptable for immigration compliance.

A school may approve a leave longer than 150 days. However, that does not necessarily mean IRCC will treat the entire period as an authorized leave for the purpose of maintaining study-permit compliance.

IRCC’s compliance instructions state that a leave from studies should not exceed 150 consecutive days from the date the leave began. If the leave exceeds 150 days, a student who remains in Canada may need to change their immigration status or risk being considered non-compliant with their study-permit conditions.

The Legal Basis: Why the 150-Day Rule Matters

The 150-day number itself does not appear directly in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

Instead, the underlying legal requirement comes from section 220.1(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR).

It provides that the holder of a study permit in Canada must:

1. remain enrolled at the designated learning institution named on their permit until completing their studies; and
2. actively pursue their course or program of study.

IRCC’s 150-day authorized-leave policy is part of its published interpretation of how a student may temporarily stop studying while still being considered to be actively pursuing their studies.

This distinction is important.

The 150-day limit is not simply a recommendation from your school. It is part of IRCC’s framework for determining whether you complied with the conditions attached to your study permit.

Is the 150-Day Limit Consecutive or Cumulative?

IRCC’s published DLI compliance guidance refers specifically to 150 consecutive days from the date the leave started.

This means unrelated short leaves should not simply be added together and treated as one cumulative 150-day leave.

For example, taking a 60-day authorized leave during one year and another separate 60-day authorized leave much later does not automatically create a 120-day leave for the purpose of this rule.

However, multiple leaves can still cause other concerns.

IRCC specifically states “If the multiple periods of leave do not appear to support the expectation that the student is making reasonable progress toward the completion of their course or program of study in the time allotted by the course or program of study, the officer may determine that the study permit holder has not fulfilled the condition to actively pursue their course or program of study.”

IRCC can assess your overall study history when determining whether you were genuinely enrolled and actively pursuing your studies. A pattern of repeated withdrawals, long gaps, part-time semesters, suspensions, or unexplained absences may therefore require a broader compliance assessment even if no individual authorized leave exceeded 150 consecutive days.

What Happens If Your Leave Exceeds 150 Days?

Once an authorized leave extends beyond 150 consecutive days, the situation becomes significantly more complicated.

IRCC’s compliance guidance states that if a student exceeds 150 days of leave, they need to change their status with IRCC or they may be considered non-compliant with their study-permit conditions.

That does not necessarily mean that temporary resident status automatically disappears on day 151.

Under IRPR 222 (1), A study permit becomes invalid upon the first to occur of the following days:

(a) the day that is 90 days after the day on which the permit holder completes their studies,
(a.1) the day on which the permit holder is no longer enrolled at the designated learning institution that is named in the permit, other than as a result of completing their studies;
(b) the day on which the study permit is cancelled under section 222.7, 222.8 or 243.2; or
(c) the day on which the permit expires.

In addition, under section 47 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), a foreign national can lose temporary resident status following a determination by an officer or the Immigration Division that the person failed to comply with a requirement of the Act.

Nevertheless, exceeding the 150-day period while remaining in Canada as a student can create a serious study-permit compliance issue that may later be examined when applying for a PGWP.

Why Restoration Can Become Complicated

Students sometimes assume that if there was a study-permit compliance problem, they can simply restore their status within 90 days.

That is not always the case.

Under IRPR section 182(2):

an officer shall not restore the status of a student who is not in compliance with a condition set out in subsection 220.1(1).

Section 220.1(1) is the provision requiring students to remain enrolled and actively pursue their studies.

The precise application of this provision depends on the student’s circumstances and their compliance at the time restoration is being assessed. However, it means that a section 220.1 compliance problem cannot safely be treated like an ordinary expired-status case.

The Six-Month Work Permit Restriction

A separate issue can arise under IRPR section 200(3)(e).

This provision states that an officer generally cannot issue a work permit to a foreign national who:

• engaged in unauthorized study;
• engaged in unauthorized work; or
• failed to comply with a condition of a previous permit or authorization,

unless one of the regulatory exceptions applies.

One of those exceptions is where six months have elapsed since the unauthorized activity or failure to comply ended. Other specific exceptions are also contained in the regulation.

Because a PGWP is a work permit, section 200(3)(e) can become particularly important where IRCC concludes that a student previously failed to comply with their study-permit conditions.

This is one reason an extended leave should not be looked at only as a question of whether the leave itself was “approved” by the school.

The immigration consequences can extend beyond the leave.

You Cannot Work During an Authorized Leave

Another frequently overlooked issue is employment.

IRCC expressly states that students cannot work on or off campus during an authorized leave from their studies, even if their study permit normally authorizes them to work.

This means a student with a leave-of-absence problem may potentially have two separate compliance issues:

1. whether the length or circumstances of the leave complied with their study permit; and
2. whether they performed unauthorized work during the leave.

Unauthorized work can independently engage IRPR section 200(3)(e), so employment records during the leave period should always be reviewed carefully.

How Officers Assess a PGWP Application Involving a Leave

IRCC’s current PGWP guidance states that an applicant may not be eligible for a PGWP if they took an unauthorized leave and IRCC finds that they failed to meet the conditions of their study permit.

IRCC also confirms that an authorized leave of up to 150 days may still comply with study-permit conditions. Applicants should provide evidence that their DLI authorized the leave when applying for a PGWP.

Where a leave creates a potential compliance issue, the assessment can involve much more than simply counting days.

Depending on the case, relevant evidence may include:

• the exact start and end dates of the leave;
• whether scheduled breaks were part of the leave;
• whether the DLI formally authorized it;
• how the DLI recorded the student’s status;
• the reason for the leave;
• medical or other supporting documentation;
• whether the student remained in Canada or was outside Canada;
• whether the student changed immigration status;
• whether the student worked during the leave;
• when the student resumed studies;
• the student’s enrolment history before and after the leave; and
• whether there were other periods of part-time study, withdrawal, suspension or academic inactivity.

IRCC can request school records, transcripts, documents relating to the reason for a leave, and any other evidence an officer considers relevant when assessing compliance.

Do Officers Have Discretion to Approve an Ineligible PGWP?

This requires an important distinction.

There is no general provision in the IRPA, IRPR or publicly available PGWP instructions giving an immigration officer equitable or humanitarian discretion to simply waive PGWP eligibility requirements because an applicant has sympathetic circumstances.

Federal Court decisions have repeatedly confirmed that PGWP eligibility requirements are mandatory and that officers generally do not have authority to modify or waive those requirements.

However, that does not mean officers exercise no judgment at all.

There is a difference between:

waiving an eligibility requirement, which officers generally cannot do,

and

assessing whether an applicant actually complied with their study-permit conditions, which can require judgment and a consideration of the evidence.

Federal Court decisions such as Munyanyi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 802 and Sugagata v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 1436 have recognized that officers assessing study-permit compliance should exercise their best judgment and consider relevant circumstances.

This is an important but narrow distinction.

An officer’s ability to assess compliance should not be confused with a legal power to simply waive an established PGWP requirement.

What We See in Practice

The practical reality is less predictable than the written rules may suggest.

Despite the strict wording of the PGWP requirements and Federal Court decisions confirming that officers cannot simply waive mandatory criteria, we regularly see applications approved where the facts appeared to fall outside IRCC’s published eligibility rules.

That should not be interpreted as proof that officers possess a legally recognized discretionary power to approve an otherwise ineligible applicant.

An unexpected approval may result from:

• the officer’s assessment of whether non-compliance actually occurred;
• a particular interpretation of the applicant’s circumstances;
• the evidence presented;
• the way the DLI characterized the student’s academic history;
• facts not apparent from the basic study timeline;
• administrative inconsistency; or
• an officer reaching a conclusion that cannot be fully explained from the approval alone.

In other words, approvals do happen in difficult cases, but an applicant cannot claim a legal entitlement to discretionary relief simply because another applicant with similar facts was approved.

Does a Leave Longer Than 150 Days Mean Your PGWP Will Automatically Be Refused?

Not necessarily.

But this needs to be understood carefully.

IRCC’s published rules do not create a general exception allowing an authorized leave to exceed 150 days while automatically preserving study-permit compliance.

At the same time, the legal consequences of an extended leave depend on the complete circumstances of the case.

For example:

• Was the leave formally authorized by the school?
• Exactly how long was it?
• Was the student inside or outside Canada?
• Did the student change immigration status?
• Did the student work during the leave?
• When did the student resume studying?
• How did the school report the student’s status?
• Were there additional periods of part-time study or inactivity?
• Is there evidence explaining circumstances beyond the student’s control?

Those questions can materially affect how the file should be presented and assessed.

At Mygration Immigration, we have successfully obtained a full three-year PGWP for a student whose school-authorized leave exceeded eight months, significantly longer than the published 150-day limit.

Read the full case study → Complex PGWP Leave of Absence Over 8 Months

That result should not be interpreted as a formal exception to the 150-day rule.

Instead, it demonstrates why difficult PGWP cases should be examined individually rather than assuming either that approval is guaranteed or that refusal is inevitable.

What a Strong PGWP Submission Should Include

Where an extended leave creates a potential PGWP eligibility or compliance issue, submitting only the standard documents may leave an officer with unanswered questions.

A properly prepared submission may include:

• a precise chronological timeline;
• the DLI’s authorization of the leave;
• enrolment letters and transcripts;
• medical or other supporting evidence explaining the leave;
• evidence establishing where the applicant was during the relevant period;
• immigration-status documents;
• evidence showing when studies resumed;
• employment records where work authorization could be an issue;
• an explanation of any other academic gaps or part-time semesters;
• analysis of the applicable IRPA and IRPR provisions;
• relevant IRCC Program Delivery Instructions; and
• where appropriate, applicable Federal Court jurisprudence.

The objective is not simply to ask an officer to “make an exception.”

A strong submission should first identify exactly what legal or compliance issue exists, explain how the relevant rules apply to the applicant’s facts, and provide the evidence necessary for the officer to properly assess the case.

Common Mistakes That Can Make the Situation Worse

Some of the most common problems we see include:

• assuming that because the school approved the leave, IRCC must also accept the entire period;
• failing to keep written confirmation that the DLI authorized the leave;
• working during the authorized leave;
• ignoring a leave or academic gap in the PGWP application;
• failing to distinguish between a regularly scheduled break and a leave of absence;
• submitting an explanation without supporting evidence;
• assuming restoration will automatically cure a study-permit compliance issue; and
• waiting until after a PGWP refusal to investigate what happened.

These cases are usually easier to address when the potential issue is identified before the PGWP application is submitted.

What Should You Do If Your Leave Exceeded 150 Days?

Do not assume your case is automatically hopeless.

But you also should not assume that a letter from your school saying the leave was “authorized” completely resolves the issue.

Before filing the PGWP application, reconstruct the complete timeline and determine:

1. when the leave began;
2. when it ended;
3. whether it exceeded 150 consecutive days;
4. where you were during the leave;
5. what immigration status you held;
6. whether you worked;
7. how your DLI recorded the leave; and
8. whether there were any other academic or immigration compliance issues.

Once those facts are established, the PGWP eligibility and study-permit compliance issues can be properly assessed.

Get a Free Personalized PGWP Assessment →

If your situation also involves unauthorized work, part-time semesters, program changes, withdrawals, suspensions or other academic gaps, those issues should generally be reviewed together rather than in isolation. 

Learn About Complex PGWP Cases →

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Does the 150-day limit apply to every authorized leave?

IRCC’s published guidance provides that an authorized leave may be up to a maximum of 150 days while the student continues to be considered actively pursuing their studies.

A school may academically authorize a longer leave, but that does not automatically mean IRCC will consider the entire period compliant with study-permit conditions.

2. What if I was outside Canada during my leave?

Your location can be relevant to the legal and compliance analysis.

IRPR section 220.1(1) expressly refers to the holder of a study permit in Canada, and a student’s location may therefore matter when determining the consequences of a particular period of inactivity. However, being outside Canada does not automatically eliminate every potential PGWP eligibility issue.

Your entire study and immigration timeline still needs to be assessed.

3. Can I still apply for a PGWP if my leave exceeded 150 days?

You can submit an application, but whether you qualify for a PGWP depends on the facts and the applicable rules.

An extended leave may create a study-permit compliance problem and potentially affect work-permit issuance. Before applying, the period should be assessed against IRPR section 220.1, IRPR section 200(3)(e), the PGWP instructions and any applicable case law.

4. Does the 150-day count include weekends and holidays?

Yes. IRCC describes the limit as 150 consecutive days or, in some published guidance, 150 calendar days.

It is not limited to instructional or school days.

5. What if my school never gave me a formal leave letter?

That can create an evidentiary problem.

IRCC expects an applicant relying on an authorized leave to be able to demonstrate that the DLI authorized it. Depending on the circumstances, other institutional evidence may help establish what occurred, but the absence of formal documentation should be reviewed carefully.

6. Do multiple short leaves add together toward the 150-day limit?

IRCC’s published guidance refers to 150 consecutive days, not a cumulative lifetime limit across the student’s entire program.

Separate leaves are therefore not automatically added together to create one 150-day leave.

However, repeated absences can still become relevant when IRCC assesses the student’s overall enrolment and whether they were actively pursuing their studies.

7. Does a medical leave have an exception to the 150-day rule?

No automatic exemption exists simply because the leave was medical.

Medical reasons are expressly recognized as a possible basis for an authorized leave, but IRCC’s published authorized-leave guidance still refers to a maximum of 150 days.

Medical evidence can nevertheless be extremely important when explaining the circumstances surrounding a period of study and when an officer is assessing compliance.

8. Do PGWP applications involving compliance issues take longer?

IRCC does not publish a separate processing standard for PGWP applications involving leaves of absence or study-permit compliance concerns.

In practice, however, complex applications can take longer than straightforward PGWP files, particularly where an officer conducts a more detailed review or requests additional documents.

This should be treated as a practical observation rather than a guaranteed difference in processing time.

9. Will IRCC contact me before refusing my PGWP because of a leave?

Not necessarily.

An officer is not always required to give an applicant another opportunity to correct an application simply because the evidence submitted does not establish eligibility.

For that reason, a known leave or academic-history issue should generally be addressed with the initial PGWP application rather than waiting for IRCC to ask about it.

10. Should I disclose an extended leave in my PGWP application?

If the leave is material to your PGWP eligibility or study-permit compliance, it should normally be addressed proactively.

IRCC can request documents from your school concerning enrolment, leave dates and academic status, and DLIs also have compliance-reporting obligations.

Trying to avoid addressing a known problem can make it much more difficult to properly explain the circumstances later.

11. Can I appeal a PGWP refusal based on a leave-of-absence issue?

There is no ordinary immigration appeal process for a PGWP refusal.

Depending on the circumstances, potential options may include:

• requesting reconsideration;
• submitting a new application where legally available; or
• applying to the Federal Court for judicial review.

The appropriate option depends heavily on the reason for refusal, current immigration status and applicable deadlines.

12. Can a study-permit compliance finding affect permanent residence later?

Potentially, but it does not automatically make someone ineligible for permanent residence.

A previous finding of non-compliance can become relevant in later immigration applications depending on the circumstances, particularly where there were issues involving status, unauthorized work or study, or inaccurate information provided to IRCC.

The consequences therefore need to be assessed based on the specific history rather than assuming that a PGWP problem permanently prevents someone from immigrating to Canada.