Federal Court Orders IRCC to Process Gaza TRV Applications After Unreasonable Delay
- Citation
- 2026 FC 357
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-7442-24, IMM-18705-24, IMM-18712-24, IMM-18719-24, IMM-18856-24, IMM-20029-24, IMM-20737-24, IMM-2069-25, IMM-7470-24, IMM-7512-24, IMM-7588-24, IMM-7725-24, IMM-9506-24, IMM-9516-24, IMM-9522-24, IMM-9532-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
A.F.M.B. et al. v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 357
The Applicants, 76 Palestinian nationals from Gaza, sought an order of mandamus to compel IRCC to process their web form submissions for a special Temporary Resident Visa (TRV) policy. IRCC failed to issue them the required unique reference codes before the policy's application cap was met and the program closed.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court granted the application, ordering IRCC to assess the web forms despite the policy's expiry. The Court found the delay in processing was unreasonable and that IRCC could not rely on the program's closure-a situation it contributed to-to argue that a remedy would be futile.
Key Quote from the Court
Together, this evidence from the CTR supports a conclusion that the fact that the Applicants did not receive Codes was not a function of the time that it reasonably took IRCC to process a large volume of submissions but rather resulted from some (albeit unidentified) process failure on the part of IRCC.
Expert Takeaways
-
Policy Expiry is Not a Shield for Unreasonable Delay This ruling confirms the Court's power to 'turn back the clock.' If IRCC's unreasonable delay prevents an applicant from meeting a deadline or cap in a temporary policy, the Court can order the application to be processed as if the delay had not occurred.
-
Mandamus Remains a Powerful Tool for Delays When IRCC fails to process an application step within a reasonable time, leading to an implied refusal, mandamus is the correct remedy. The Court found a delay of over a year for a simple completeness check was unreasonable on its face.
-
Legitimate Expectations Arise from Public Instructions IRCC's public-facing instructions on its website (e.g., 'If your submission meets the requirements, we'll send you a letter... with your unique reference code') can create a legitimate expectation, giving rise to a legal duty of procedural fairness that the Court will enforce.
-
The Burden of Justifying Delay Falls on IRCC When faced with an allegation of unreasonable delay, the onus is on IRCC to provide a satisfactory justification. Simply stating that a large volume of applications was received is not sufficient, especially when internal records show a process failure.
How long is too long?
There is no deadline to bring a mandamus application - and no fixed number of months that makes a delay unlawful. The Federal Court asks whether the delay is longer than the process reasonably requires, whether you have already asked for a decision and given the department a fair chance to make one, and whether the explanation offered for the wait actually holds up. The published processing time for your application type is where that comparison starts.
Does this ruling apply to your situation?
Tick whatever is true for you. Nothing is sent anywhere - this stays in your browser.
That combination is worth a proper look. It does not mean you have a case - only a lawyer reading your actual documents can say that - but it does mean your delay is worth measuring against what the law expects.
Disclaimer
The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law is complex and subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please schedule a consultation with a qualified legal professional.
Want a second look at your refusal?
We assess IRCC refusals and pursue judicial review at the Federal Court when the decision is unreasonable.
No obligation - we review your documents and tell you if a Federal Court application is realistic.
Questions people ask after reading a case like this
How long is too long before I can go to court?
There is no fixed number in the legislation. The Federal Court asks whether the delay is longer than the process reasonably requires and whether the department has a satisfactory justification for it. The published processing time for your application type is the usual starting point for that comparison - but it is a benchmark, not a legal deadline.
Is there a filing deadline for a mandamus application?
No. Mandamus concerns a decision that has not been made, so the 15-day and 60-day limits that apply to challenging a refusal do not apply here. Delay in bringing the application is still something the Court can weigh, so waiting indefinitely is not cost-free.
Do I have to ask IRCC for a decision first?
Normally yes. One of the requirements is a prior demand for the decision and a reasonable time for the department to respond. Keeping a record of your requests and the replies you received matters, because that correspondence is part of what the Court looks at.
What does the Court actually order if I win?
Mandamus does not decide your application and it does not order an approval. Where the requirements are met, the Court orders the department to make a decision, usually within a set period. The decision itself can still go either way.
Will going to court hurt my application?
Officers are required to decide each application on its merits. Asking the Court to compel a decision does not change the legal test that is applied to your file.
More Temporary Resident Visa (TRV) / Visitor Visa rulings
ARC Refusal Overturned: Officer Failed to Consider Applicant's Establishment Evidence
Court Rules Vague Fraud Allegations Violate Procedural Fairness
Federal Court Overturns Visitor Visa Refusal for Ignoring Evidence
IRCC Reopened Your File? Your Judicial Review May Be Dismissed as Moot
Written by
Ali Dadkhah
Ali Dadkhah is a litigator whose practice is dedicated to challenging government decisions at the Federal Court of Canada. He specializes in judicial review, providing a crucial avenue for recourse for individuals and businesses who have faced unfair or unreasonable administrative outcomes. Bilingual legal support in English and Persian (Farsi)