Enes Etlik had a well-defined plan when he arrived in Calgary. He enrolled in the University of Calgary’s foreign trained lawyers program, a one-year certification track intended for foreign-credentialed attorneys who wish to practice law in Canada. He is a dual citizen of Turkey and Belgium. There were six courses separating him from that objective. Five of them were passed by him. Everything else collapsed along the sixth, which turned into the fault line.
There is more to the U of C international student lawsuit Etlik filed in September 2025 than just a single exam that was missed or a deadline that was contested. It’s about how an international student’s entire life in Canada can be ruined by a single procedural error, such as a supplemental exam that is not given by August 30. Etlik claims that the university failed to adhere to its own academic calendar, raising concerns about immigration status, career prospects, and the ability to take a flight home.
He filed a statement of claim with the Court of King’s Bench, requesting $499,999 in damages. The breakdown speaks for itself: $150,000 for what he calls “severe mental distress,” $120,000 for lost wages and moving expenses, and $32,000 for tuition. These figures aren’t made up. He claims that by failing to administer a supplemental exam on time, the university caused actual harm, represented by each figure. In the end, he took the test. He died. However, his window to apply for post-graduation work permits and articling positions had already closed on August 30.
The case is more difficult to ignore because of what has transpired since the purported failure. Etlik is currently in Belgium and cannot go back to Canada. He claims that his application for a work permit extension has been pending for almost nine months and that he has been turned down twice for flights to Canada. In a literal and real sense, he is barred from the nation where he established his legal career and where his legal case is still pending without his physical presence.
Etlik must post phased security payments totaling up to $88,000 if the case proceeds through all stages, according to an order issued by Justice Stephanie Latimer in July. The $7,000 first installment is due on November 30. Such security orders may be granted under Alberta’s legal regulations if the plaintiff resides outside of the country or if there are indications that the case may be frivolous and assets would not be sufficient to cover potential costs. Etlik completely disputes that framing. He stated, “If I don’t make this payment, the case will not be heard,” which is a statement that merits careful consideration.
A legal system that effectively costs someone close to $90,000 for the opportunity to present their case is unsettling. The security-for-costs mechanism creates a significant financial barrier regardless of the outcome of the underlying lawsuit, which particularly affects foreign plaintiffs because living overseas is one of the order’s triggering conditions. Courts may have good structural justifications for this practice. Additionally, it may disproportionately exclude the very cross-border disputes that most people need to be heard.
In the meantime, the University of Calgary has been managing its own challenges related to foreign enrollment. Due to federal visa caps that reduced incoming students by about 40% nationwide, the school reported an 8.8% decline in international students between 2023 and 2024, followed by a further 16.3% decline in 2025. The previous foreign student cap cost the institution what it claimed was $35 million in lost revenue. These are unrelated to Etlik’s case, but they provide an interesting backdrop: a university facing financial difficulties due to declining international enrollment is currently defending itself against a lawsuit filed by an international graduate student who claims it failed him.
The purpose of the program for foreign-trained attorneys is to introduce capable legal minds to the Canadian legal system. Among those candidates was Etlik. Regardless of the court’s final decision regarding liability, his current predicament—practically stateless from the Canadian legal market, stranded abroad, battling a lawsuit from across the Atlantic with worsening financial circumstances—does not speak well of how the system handled someone who came trying to do everything correctly.
