Ruling notes counsel acknowledged immigration department’s request for outstanding documents
In a case alleging unreasonable delay against Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), the Federal Court dismissed an application for mandamus upon finding that a citizenship applicant and her counsel were responsible for the delay.
In Manes v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 80, the applicant was an Indian citizen. In April 2018, she applied for citizenship based on adoption and got an acknowledgment of the receipt of her application.
In August 2021, an entry made in the global case management system (GCMS) notes indicated that IRCC received an inquiry from a member of Parliament’s BC office regarding the application.
In March 2024, the applicant served a demand letter asking IRCC to process her application. She served another demand letter via the web form in May 2024.
In June 2024, an entry made in the GCMS notes recommended an interview for the applicant, who had not provided the required adoption deed.
In July 2024 and January 2025, the applicant sent IRCC demand letters requesting a decision on her application.
In April 2025, a final entry made in the GCMS notes stated that an email to the applicant required her to send the following documents or proof that she was gathering these documents within 45 days so that IRCC could proceed with her application:
- an adoption deed copy, translated into English
- proof of communication between the child and her adoptive parents
- the adopted child’s educational documents
- her passport biodata pages
- her Aadhar card
The applicant applied for an order of mandamus directing IRCC to decide her citizenship application under s. 22.1(2) of the Citizenship Act, 1985.
The applicant alleged that she and her counsel were not responsible for the delay in the processing of her citizenship application because she had submitted all required documents.
The citizenship and immigration minister, as the respondent in this case, countered that the applicant and her counsel caused the delay. The respondent added that the applicant failed to prove that the delay was so excessive that it amounted to an implied refusal to act.
Mandamus denied
The Federal Court dismissed the mandamus application without costs. First, the court did not consider the mandamus application moot, given that IRCC has yet to issue a decision on the citizenship application, as requested by the applicant.
Next, the court determined that the applicant failed to establish a clear right to the performance of a public legal duty to act under the test for mandamus in Apotex Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) (C.A.), 1993 CanLII 3004 (FCA), [1994] 1 FC 742.
The court ruled that the applicant failed to show that IRCC engaged in unreasonable delay in performing its duty to decide the outcome of her citizenship application.
Pursuant to one of three factors in Conille v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (T.D.), 1998 CanLII 9097 (FC), the delay would be unreasonable if the applicant and her counsel were not responsible for the delay.
In this case, the court found the applicant and her counsel responsible for the delay. In reaching this conclusion, the court noted the following:
- In October 2018, IRCC asked the applicant to submit documents, including the Canadian certificate preparation form, the adoptee’s application, and two affidavits of individuals present during the adoption
- A letter to IRCC in August 2021 showed that the applicant’s counsel openly acknowledged that IRCC had requested documents in October 2018
- An entry in the GCMS notes in June 2024 indicated that the adoption deed, which the citizenship application did not include, was still outstanding
- In the applicant’s demand letter to IRCC in January 2025, her counsel referred to the June 2024 GCMS notes, which demonstrated that the applicant knew about the outstanding adoption deed and the interview recommendation
- The last entry in the GCMS notes in April 2025 required the applicant to send multiple documents, including the adoption deed, within 45 days, so that IRCC could move forward with the citizenship application
- The applicant failed to submit the relevant documents, as requested by IRCC in October 2018, until August 2021
