The
Federal Court considered an application for mandamus brought by an
Iranian applicant whose study permit application had remained undecided for
more than two and a half years. The Court concluded that Immigration, Refugees
and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) failed to justify the prolonged delay and ordered
the Department to render a decision within 30 days. The Court also awarded
costs to the applicant.
Key
Principle
Where
an applicant establishes that an immigration application has been subject to
unreasonable delay, and IRCC cannot provide satisfactory evidence justifying
the delay, the Federal Court may grant mandamus compelling IRCC to make a
decision. Unsupported references to security screening or administrative
backlogs are insufficient.
Background
Seyedmahmood
Kia applied for a Canadian study permit to pursue a PhD in Mechanical
Engineering at the University of Alberta. His application remained pending for
more than two and a half years, causing repeated deferrals of his doctoral
studies and jeopardizing his admission. After numerous inquiries failed to
produce a decision or meaningful explanation, he sought an order of mandamus
from the Federal Court.
Court Findings
- Delay Far Exceeded the Nature of the Process
Justice Battista held that the delay substantially
exceeded both IRCC’s published processing standards and the time reasonably
required for study permit applications, even accounting for routine security
screening. The prolonged delay frustrated the statutory objectives of efficient
immigration processing and facilitating the entry of international students.
- IRCC Failed to Justify the Delay
The Court found that IRCC produced no current
evidence explaining why the application remained pending. Although government
counsel suggested that security screening caused the delay, no affidavit or
up-to-date evidence supported that assertion. Submissions by counsel could not
substitute for evidence. Without a satisfactory explanation, IRCC failed to
discharge its burden of justifying the delay.
- Benison Governs Modern Mandamus Applications
Justice Battista confirmed that the recent decision
of the Federal Court of Appeal in Benison v. Canada (Royal Canadian Mounted
Police External Review Committee), 2026 FCA 53 applies to immigration
mandamus applications. Once an applicant establishes the essential elements of
the Apotex test, the burden shifts to the government to demonstrate why
mandamus should be withheld. The Court rejected the Minister’s argument that Benison has limited application in immigration matters.
- Costs Awarded for IRCC’s Conduct
The Court found special reasons to award costs
because IRCC repeatedly failed to provide meaningful information regarding the
delay, forcing the applicant to pursue access-to-information requests and
judicial review simply to understand the status of his application. The Court
awarded costs of $1,000.
Outcome
The
Federal Court granted the application for judicial review and issued an order
of mandamus, requiring IRCC to render a decision on the study permit
application within 30 days. The applicant was also awarded $1,000 in
costs.
Case Citation: Kia v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 780 (CanLII)
