Writ of Mandamus and Immigration Delays
Immigration Law Office
Proudly serving clients in Canada and outside.
What Is a Writ of Mandamus and How Does It Impact Your Immigration Application?
Is your immigration application stuck in endless delays? It can be frustrating, but there is a powerful legal tool that can help you get your case moving again: a writ of mandamus.
We have already helped many applicants in having their applications finalized by using mandamus process and forced Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) makes a decision on their applications without further delays.
A writ of mandamus in immigration is a court order that commands the IRCC to make a final decision on your application within a specified timeframe, most commonly within one or two months after the decision is made.
You will not be penalized or punished in any way for filing a mandamus application. In fact, you will benefit from this process, as it ensures your immigration application is finally taken out of the pile of others and given the focused attention it deserves. By making mandamus application, you are simply advocating for a fair and timely decision on your case, ensuring it is no longer lost in the backlog.
If you’ve been waiting far too long for your immigration application to be processed, a writ of mandamus is the only tool that can force IRCC to make a decision on your application. This is not about jumping ahead in line; it’s about ensuring that your case receives the timely attention it deserves.
Once a writ of mandamus is filed, IRCC is more likely to prioritize your application. Many of our clients see results within 60 days of filing. A writ of mandamus can be used for many types of immigration applications, including permanent residence, temporary residence, citizenship, work permits, student visas, and more.
Whether you're applying for permanent residence, temporary residence, citizenship, or any other type of immigration status, our team of skilled immigration lawyers can help you navigate this process efficiently.
Do I Qualify for a Writ of Mandamus?
Not everyone experiencing delays in their immigration application will qualify for a writ of mandamus. To determine if this is the right path for you, your situation must meet the following criteria:
-
IRCC has a legal duty to act and that duty is owed to you. You have to prove that IRCC has a positive legal duty owed to the applicant to access the application and to render a decision within a reasonable time. Such duty can normally be found in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act or Regulations. Since immigration applications are a public service, this criterion is generally met.
-
You Have a Clear Legal Right: You must have a clear right to have your application processed. This means you've submitted all required documents, paid the necessary fees, and completed any additional steps IRCC requested.
-
Unreasonable Delays: If your immigration application has been pending for what seems like an eternity, it might be time to consider a writ of mandamus. While there isn’t a one-size-fits-all answer to what constitutes an "unreasonable delay," here’s a guide to help you understand. IRCC publishes processing times for various types of applications on its website, which serve as a guideline to assess whether your application is delayed. These processing times indicate the timeframe within which IRCC should make a decision on your application. It's important to note that the published timelines apply only to the "most complete and non-complex" applications. Therefore, the assistance of an experienced lawyer is crucial in determining whether your application has been delayed, especially given IRCC's practice of issuing last-minute requests for additional information or Procedural Fairness Letters:
-
Prior Efforts to Resolve the Delay: Before seeking a writ of mandamus, you should have made efforts to contact IRCC and request updates on your application. Our team can help you with these demand letters, which serve as evidence that you've tried to resolve the issue without court intervention. Very often properly written and submitted Demand letter delivers results and the final decision is made within the timeframe requested.
-
No Other Adequate Remedy: A writ of mandamus should be considered when no other effective means of getting a decision on your application is available.
Why Work with Immigration Lawyers for a Writ of Mandamus?
The immigration process is complicated, and delays are often out of your control. That’s why working with immigration lawyers is essential. Here’s why our firm is the best choice for handling your writ of mandamus:
-
Expertise in Immigration Law: We have extensive experience handling writ of mandamus cases and know exactly how to present your case to the Federal Court.
-
Proven Success: Most of our clients see results within 60 days of filing a writ of mandamus, giving you peace of mind that your immigration process won’t drag on any longer.
-
We Handle Everything: From gathering documents to filing the application and even representing you in court, we manage the entire process from start to finish.
How We Assist with the Mandamus Process
The immigration process can be overwhelming, but you don’t have to navigate it alone. We are here to help you every step of the way, ensuring that your writ of mandamus is handled efficiently and effectively.
-
Initial Consultation: We’ll review your case and advise you on the best course of action.
-
Customized Strategy: We develop a tailored plan to address the specific issues causing delays in your immigration application.
-
Demand Letter: In many cases, we start by sending a persuasive demand letter to IRCC, giving them a final chance to act.
-
Filing the Mandamus Application: If necessary, we proceed with filing the writ of mandamus to ensure your case is prioritized.
Federal Court's Practice on Mandamus Applications
Kreishan v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FCA 223 at para 18 (CanLII), [2020] 2 FCR 299.
"In an application for leave and for judicial review applicants must submit a fairly arguable case, that is, a case with serious issues."
Note: the unreasonable delay in rendering a final decision is presumed to be "a serious issue".
Conille v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 FC 33, 1998 CanLII 9097 (TD) at para 23, Tremblay-Lamer J (Conille).
An unreasonable wait time is inferred from a look at:
(1) any waiting that is prima facie longer than the nature of a process demands,
(2) who is responsible for that delay and
(3) whether a decision-maker has justified the wait time satisfactorily.
Tapie v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2007 FC 1048 at para 7
Delays in the processing of an application must be assessed in terms of the particular facts of the case: ;
Jaballah v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 1051 at para 94
It is also true that IRCC's publicly posted processing time data should not be considered a guaranteed service standard, but a simple indication as to average processing times at any given point in time. Although IRCC may try to process most applications within target timeframes, expecting the IRCC to adhere to this timeframe for all applications would ignore the complexity of our immigration regime.
However 'blanket statements' justifying delays because of pending (and long outstanding) security assessments are inadequate, as this Court has determined in multiple instances: Ghaddar v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2023 FC 946 at para 33; Bidgoly at paras 37--38; Almuhtadi at para 40; Kanthasamyiyar v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2015 FC 1248 at paras 49-50; Abdolkhaleghi v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 729 at para 26.
Furthermore, aside from general and potentially speculative statements made by the Minister over the course of this judicial review application, the Applicants have not been apprised of any specific security concerns that may explain the delay in their case. The Minister implies that there may be inadmissibility concerns due to Mr. Murugiah's previously claimed association with the LTTE, but this concern, to the extent that it is a live one, has never been put to the Applicants. I find in these circumstances that the Minister has not pointed to any specific or particularly complex security concerns that would adequately justify the significant delays in this case.
