Mandamus Granted: Court Compels IRCC to Act on Unreasonable Immigration Delay

Peng v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 2.

In an important judgement for Canadian Immigration law, the Federal Court of Canada issued a decision in Lanxi Peng v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2025 FC 2), granting an order of mandamus to compel Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to decide on a long-delayed Permanent Residence (PR) application. This case underscores critical principles about delays in immigration processes, the duty of fairness, and the obligations of IRCC to uphold statutory objectives.

Case Overview

Lanxi Peng, a Chinese citizen, applied for Permanent Residence through the Provincial Nominee Program (PNP) in March 2021. Despite consistent communication and timely responses to IRCC’s requests, her application remained undecided for nearly four years—well beyond the average processing time of 12 months. In the meantime, Ms. Peng and her mother endured significant personal and professional hardship due to the prolonged delay. Faced with no resolution and unsatisfactory explanations from IRCC, Ms. Peng sought judicial review, requesting an order of mandamus to compel IRCC to decide on her application.

Key Issues

The Court addressed whether the prolonged delay justified an order of mandamus. Two main factors from the test established in?Apotex Inc v. Canada (Attorney General)?were contested:

1.???? Unreasonable delay: Was the delay in processing the application unreasonable?

2.???? Balance of convenience: Did the balance of hardship favor the applicant or IRCC?

The Court’s Analysis

1.???? Unreasonable Delay:

The Court found the delay to be unreasonable, emphasizing that IRCC failed to provide a satisfactory justification for the nearly four-year processing time. While IRCC cited the applicant’s “immigration history” and pending security checks as reasons for the delay, the Court ruled these explanations insufficient. Importantly, the Court highlighted that Ms. Peng’s case was not inherently complex and that IRCC’s delay was inconsistent with its statutory obligation to process applications promptly and fairly.

2.???? Balance of Convenience:

The Court ruled in favor of Ms. Peng, citing the significant emotional and financial hardship caused by the delay. Ms. Peng and her mother faced health issues, career stagnation, and prolonged family separation. IRCC’s suggestion that the applicant could mitigate separation by visiting her mother abroad was dismissed as irrelevant and inconsistent with the objective of family reunification under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).

Significance of the Decision

This decision sets a precedent for addressing unreasonable delays in immigration applications. The Court reaffirmed that IRCC has a duty to process applications within a reasonable timeframe, balancing efficiency with the objectives of the IRPA, including family reunification and fair procedures. Moreover, the judgment reinforces that prolonged and unexplained delays can lead to judicial intervention, particularly when applicants face undue hardship.

Outcome

The Court granted the application for judicial review and ordered IRCC to make a decision on Ms. Peng’s application within 90 days.

Key Takeaways for Stakeholders

·????? Applicants: This case highlights the importance of timely responses and consistent follow-up with IRCC. Applicants facing prolonged delays may have recourse through the courts.

·????? IRCC: The ruling underscores the need for transparency, prompt communication, and adherence to statutory objectives in application processing.

·????? Legal Professionals: This judgment provides a robust framework for challenging unreasonable delays in immigration processes, particularly through the Apotex test.

Final Thoughts

This case serves as a reminder that fairness, accountability, and timely action are the cornerstones of a robust immigration system. It is a victory for individuals navigating complex immigration pathways and a call to action for institutions to uphold their commitments to applicants and their families.

If you or someone you know is facing unreasonable delays or other issues related to immigration applications, our firm can help. We can assist in navigating the complexities of the process. Please contact us today for a consultation on your case!