Introduction

In this article, I’ll walk you through how to request an extension of time when you’re unable to meet a Federal Court deadline during your judicial review process.

I’m assuming you’re already familiar with the basics of judicial review. If not, I highly recommend reading my post: “Understanding the Judicial Framework” — it explains the structure and deadlines involved in mandamus and judicial review applications in detail^[1].

I highly recommend contacting your local Federal Court by phone to ask how to request an extension. They can guide you on the best approach based on your specific situation. Once you have that information, this guide will help you prepare and file your motion in accordance with the Federal Court Rules.

What is an Extension of Time?

An extension of time is a request you submit to the Federal Court when you need more time to complete a required step (like submitting your Applicant’s Record or Reply Memorandum). You file a motion asking the Court to extend your deadline, and a judge will review your request and issue a decision. This decision will then be served to all parties involved.

There are two types of motions when it comes to requesting an extension:

1. Informal Motion (by consent)

This is the simpler option. You reach out to the Department of Justice (DOJ) to explain why you need more time and ask for their written consent. If they agree, you can submit a short informal motion to the Court, attaching their consent. The judge usually approves this kind of request.

2. Formal Motion

If the DOJ does not agree to your extension, or if you are unable to reach them in time, you must file a formal motion. You filling out a Motion Record, attaching affidavits explaining your reasons, providing any supporting evidence (e.g., medical issues, professional obligations like a full time job, etc.)

The DOJ may respond with a letter supporting or opposing your request, and the judge will make a final decision. It’s more involved, but don’t worry — we’ll break it down step by step in this article.

Informal motion (by consent)

An informal motion is a bundle of 3 documents submitted to the Federal Court when both parties agree to extend a deadline. It’s faster and easier than a formal motion.

Here’s what it includes:

1. Application Letter: A one-page letter addressed to the Court, explaining which rule or deadline you wish to extend, why you’re requesting more time, and confirming that you have the consent of the other party (the Department of Justice).

2. The Consent Evidence: A PDF copy of the email exchange with the DOJ showing that you requested consent and that they agreed to the extension. This proves the motion is filed on consent.

3. A Draft Order: This is a template of the Court Order you’re asking the judge to sign. It simply outlines the extension and confirms that the parties agree.

Now, let’s begin. First, you’ll need to write an email to the DOJ requesting their consent for the extension. You can download an example of this email here: informal-motion-consent-email.txt.

Make sure to read the content carefully and replace all the placeholder text (everything between the brackets) with your actual case information before sending it.

If you receive the respondent’s consent, export both your email and their reply as a single PDF file (If they refuse to consent then you have to fill a formal motion).

Now, fill out the application letter, which you can download here: informal-request-for-an-extension-of-time.docx. Make sure to replace all the highlighted fields with your case information. Replace the highlighted text “File Name” by the the name of the document you need an extension to serve, example: Applicant’s Record, Reply to Memorandum of Arguments etc..

Now let’s prepare the third and last document, the draft order, download the template from here informal-motion-draft-order.docx. Make sure to replace all the highlighted fields with your case information. Replace the highlighted text “File Name” by the the name of the document you need an extension to serve, example: Applicant’s Record, Reply to Memorandum of Arguments etc..

Once you have prepared the three documents, merge them in one file and respect the order: first the application letter, then consent evident (the email sent to DOJ and their response) and then the draft order.

That’s it, now serve the notice to DOJ, create and affidavit of service and serve them to the FC via the e-filling portal.

Formal motion

[Work in progress..]

Before initiating the mandamus process, it’s important to understand that Federal Court procedures—including mandamus applications—are strictly governed by the Federal Courts Rules. These rules outline the structure, format, and strict deadlines for every step of the judicial review process. Compliance is mandatory. A simple mistake in timing, form, or service could lead to delays or dismissal of the case.

Let’s take a step back and look at the full path your mandamus application will follow. The Federal Court has published a helpful procedural roadmap for judicial review applications related to citizenship—which also applies in mandamus situations when IRCC fails to act.

Here’s a simplified explanation of the full process step-by-step:

1. Applicant Files and Serves the Application for Leave and for Judicial Review: This is the official start of your case. You initiate a mandamus proceeding in Federal Court (FC) by fill your ALJR and serving it electronically to the FC.

2. Applicant Serves Proof of Service: Once the application is served to the FC, you file an Affidavit of Service to confirm that the documents were properly delivered. But we will skip this step because the Rule 9 kicks in automatically after a few weeks and the Court sends a notice to IRCC asking whether a decision has been made.

3. Respondent Serves a Notice of Appearance: Within 10 days of service, the DOJ must submit a Notice of Appearance, indicating they will participate in the proceedings to defend IRCC.

4. Registry Requests Written Reasons from the Tribunal: After receiving the Notice of Appearance, the Court applies Federal Court Rule 9, requesting IRCC to explain why no decision has been made.

5. Tribunal Provides a “No Decision Letter”: In response to Rule 9, IRCC submits a letter through DOJ stating that no decision has been made yet, and explaining their position.

6. Applicant Files and Serves the Applicant’s Record: Within 75 days of receiving the “Decision and Reasons Letter,” the applicant must file the Applicant’s Record, including legal arguments, evidence, and supporting documents.

7. Respondent Files and Serves the Memorandum of Argument: The DOJ responds with its Memorandum of Argument, stating why IRCC believes there is no unreasonable delay or legal obligation breached.

8. Applicant Serves the Reply Memorandum: The applicant may submit a Reply Memorandum within 10 days to respond to the DOJ’s arguments.

9. Federal Court Grants or Rejects Leave to Proceed: The judge reviews all submissions and decides whether the case has sufficient merit to proceed to a full hearing. If granted, it moves to the judicial review hearing stage.

Now, if you’re feeling overwhelmed by the legal terms or unsure about how the process works, that’s totally normal — this isn’t something most people deal with every day. The good news is: you don’t need to understand everything right away. I write a guide “How to File a Mandamus for Delayed Citizenship Application: A Step-by-Step Guide“, I walked through each step of the mandamus process in clear, simple terms, using real examples, practical advice, and links when needed. By the end of this guide, you’ll not only understand how it all works — you’ll also feel confident taking action if you decide to move forward.

One of the legal remedies available when facing prolonged silence from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) is mandamus. This is a court order issued by the Federal Court that compels a government authority—like IRCC—to perform a legal duty it has failed or refused to carry out. In immigration cases, mandamus is commonly used when IRCC does not make a decision on an application (such as for citizenship, permanent residence, or a visa) within a reasonable timeframe, despite all required documents being submitted.

The Federal Court, in decisions such as Vaziri, has emphasized that mandamus is an equitable remedy intended to address unreasonable delays by compelling public bodies to act. It ensures that applicants are not left in limbo indefinitely due to inaction or procedural stagnation.

The test for mandamus is set out in Apotex Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), 1993 CanLII 3004 (F.C.A.), [1994] 1 F.C. 742 (C.A.), 1994 CanLII 47 (S.C.C.), [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1100 (and, more recently, discussed in the immigration context in Dragan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2003 FCT 211 (CanLII), [2003] 4 F.C. 189 (T.D.), aff’d 2003 FCA 233 (CanLII), 2003 FCA 233). The eight factors are:

(i). There must be a public legal duty to act;
(ii)             The duty must be owed to the Applicants;
(iii)           There must be a clear right to the performance of that duty, meaning that:
          a.      The Applicants have satisfied all conditions precedent; and
          b.      There must have been:
 I.               A prior demand for performance;
II.              A reasonable time to comply with the demand, unless there was outright refusal; and
III.            An express refusal, or an implied refusal through unreasonable delay;
(iv)              No other adequate remedy is available to the Applicants;
(v)              The Order sought must be of some practical value or effect;
(vi)              There is no equitable bar to the relief sought;
(vii)            On a balance of convenience, mandamus should lie.

Let’s break down each part of the test in plain language so you understand what the Court is looking for — and how your situation fits.

(i) There must be a public legal duty to act:

IRCC has a public duty to process applications submitted under immigration and citizenship laws. Once an applicant has completed all required steps, the government is legally obligated to render a decision. This duty is not optional — it is set by law and policy.

(ii) The duty must be owed to the Applicants:

The duty to act must be specifically owed to the individual who is seeking the remedy. In immigration matters, this means the applicant has filed a complete and eligible application, and IRCC is the authority responsible for moving that file forward.

(iii) There must be a clear right to the performance of that duty:

Applicants must show that they are entitled to IRCC’s decision. This includes:

• (a) Satisfying all conditions precedent: The applicant must have submitted all required forms, documents, and fees, and completed all necessary steps like biometrics, tests, or interviews.

• (b) Demonstrating a refusal or delay, which includes:

• (I) A prior demand for performance: The applicant must have asked IRCC to act (e.g., via webforms, MP inquiry, or a demand letter).

• (II) A reasonable time to comply: The applicant must have waited a reasonable period after making that request. If IRCC refuses outright, this condition may be waived.

• (III) A refusal or unreasonable delay: If IRCC fails to act for a long time without valid explanation, the court may interpret that as an implied refusal.

(iv) No other adequate remedy is available to the Applicants:

Mandamus is a remedy of last resort. The applicant must show that they’ve exhausted all other reasonable avenues (e.g., contacting IRCC, submitting ATIPs, getting MP help), and there is no other effective legal option to resolve the issue.

(v) The Order sought must be of some practical value or effect:

The court will not issue a mandamus unless it can result in a meaningful outcome. In this case, it would compel IRCC to issue a decision — not a guarantee of approval, but at least to act on the pending application.

(vi) There is no equitable bar to the relief sought:

The applicant must approach the Court with “clean hands” — meaning they have acted honestly and reasonably. If the applicant caused delays, provided false information, or acted in bad faith, the Court may deny the request.

(vii) On a balance of convenience, mandamus should lie:

The Court weighs the fairness and consequences of granting the order. If the harm to the applicant from continued delay outweighs any inconvenience to IRCC, then mandamus is likely to be granted.

Introduction

If you’re stuck in immigration limbo with IRCC and your application seems forgotten for months—or even years—you might have heard about something called a mandamus. It’s a powerful legal remedy that can compel IRCC to act when they’ve taken too long to make a decision.

I went through this exact situation myself. After exhausting all my other options, I filed a mandamus application in Federal Court to get my citizenship application moving. This post breaks down every step I took—starting from the early warning signs, all the way to filing and responding in court—so you can understand how the process works and decide whether it’s right for you.

If you’re wondering whether a mandamus is too “legal” or intimidating, don’t worry. I wrote this guide specifically for people who don’t have legal backgrounds. You’ll find explanations, downloadable templates, and practical advice based on my own journey.

Key Terminologies

First of all, let’s agree on a few key terms that will appear frequently throughout this guide. Understanding these will make your reading smoother and help you follow each step with clarity.

• Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC): The federal department responsible for processing immigration, permanent residency, and citizenship applications.

• Federal Court (FC): The court that has jurisdiction over judicial reviews of decisions made by federal agencies, including IRCC.

• Department of Justice (DOJ): The legal department that represents the Government of Canada (including IRCC) in court proceedings.

• Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA): An agency responsible for border enforcement, immigration enforcement, and customs services. It may be involved in background or security checks.

• Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS): Canada’s national intelligence agency, often involved in security screening to assess any potential threats to national security.

• Background Check (BG): A general verification process that examines an applicant’s criminal, immigration, and administrative history.

• Security Screening (SS): A deeper review that may involve multiple agencies (e.g. CSIS, CBSA), assessing whether an applicant poses a risk to national security. This is often the cause of prolonged delays.

• Application for Leave and for Judicial Review (ALJR): It’s a legal process used to challenge decisions (or the lack of a decision) made by federal government bodies — like IRCC.

When Should You Consider Filing a Mandamus?

This is the first and most important question to answer. Many applicants, overwhelmed by IRCC’s silence or prolonged delays, file a mandamus application out of frustration—only to later regret doing it too early (or too late).
My first goal here is to help you understand the legal foundation and jurisprudence behind mandamus, so you can make an informed and confident decision..
Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, only granted under strict conditions. The Federal Court applies what’s known as “The Test for Mandamus”, which includes eight factors. Failing to satisfy even one of these can lead to the dismissal of your mandamus application.
These factors can generally be grouped into four key conditions:

1. IRCC has a legal duty to decide
2. You made reasonable efforts to prompt IRCC
3. The delay has caused serious prejudice
4. There was an unreasonable delay

If we fail to convince the judge of one of those 4 criteria our mandamus will be rejected and our effort will be lost. So let’s discuss those 4 points.

1. IRCC Has a Legal Duty to Decide:

This means that IRCC is legally obligated to process your application (e.g. your citizenship application). Even if your file is under review by third parties such as CBSA or CSIS for security screening, the Court has made it clear that IRCC cannot hide behind other agencies. They still have a duty toward you. So don’t worry—this condition is generally satisfied.

2. You Made Reasonable Efforts to Prompt IRCC:

The Court expects evidence that you’ve asked IRCC to complete your application using multiple channels—such as web forms, phone calls, MP intervention, and demand letters. I’ll explain how I personally gathered and documented these in my case. These efforts are crucial to prove you tried everything before going to court.

3. The Delay Has Caused Serious Prejudice:

This is where many applications fail. The Court expects evidence that the delay has negatively impacted your life in a serious way — for example, by:

• Providing a medical certificate from your doctor showing psychological harm
• Submitting a job offer that requires a Canadian passport or citizenship status
• Demonstrating separation from family due to travel restrictions in your home country, where no alternative travel document is accepted — making the Canadian passport the only viable solution to reunite with your loved ones
• etc (…)

It’s not enough to simply say “I’m anxious” or “I feel stuck.” You need evidence.

4. There Has Been an Unreasonable Delay:

This is the most debated condition, and probably the one the judge will focus on most.

There’s no fixed legal threshold, but based on past judgments, here’s what I suggest:

• If your background check is completed: Wait at least 1.5 times the official processing time. So, for example, if IRCC lists 8 months for citizenship, wait at least 12 months.
• If your background check is still in progress: Wait at least 24 months.

Why 24 months? Good question—and it deserves your full attention, because in most cases, the judge’s decision hinges on whether the delay is deemed unreasonable (in which case mandamus is granted) or not unreasonable (in which case mandamus is denied).

First, it’s important to understand that there is no single, definitive rule that determines whether a delay is reasonable or unreasonable. Instead, Federal Court judges rely primarily on the doctrine of precedent—meaning they look to prior decisions in similar cases to guide their judgment. As applicants, we must do the same and support our arguments using relevant case law.

There are several court decisions where mandamus was denied because the applicant was still undergoing security screening (SS) and the delay had not yet reached two years. For example, in Liu v. Canada (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship), 2024 FC 1341 (CanLII)—a case involving a work permit application with a much shorter expected processing time (approximately three months, compared to citizenship)—the Court ultimately dismissed the request. Let’s take a look at the final ruling:

[1] (…) Mr Liu has been waiting nearly 2 years. He asks me to issue a mandamus order compelling Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to make a decision on his application.
[6] (…) I cannot conclude that the delay is unreasonable or unexplained.
[8] (…) I must dismiss this application for judicial review.

The Honourable Mr. Justice James W. O’Reilly

This case shows how seriously the Court takes the issue of timing, especially when security screening is still ongoing.

Now let’s take another case where the applicant was under SS and the delay was more than 24 months Almuhtadi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 712 (CanLII), let’s look at the final judgement:

[37] That said, this Court has previously found a delay of two to three years or greater to be unreasonable (…)
[70] I find IRCC’s delay in processing the Applicants’ permanent residency applications is unreasonable. I therefore grant this application for judicial review (…)

The Honourable Mr. Justice Shirzad S. Ahmed

As you can see, the judge explicitly referred to a delay of “two to three years”. In other cases, judges have used terms like “slightly more than two years”, reinforcing that the threshold is not fixed but typically begins beyond the two-year mark.

So, to be clear and realistic: if your delay is under 24 months, the chances of obtaining a mandamus order are very slim. However, once the delay exceeds two years, the Court is more likely to order a mandamus.

Step 0: Before Preparing a Mandamus

Before you start filing a mandamus application in Federal Court, you need to show that you’ve tried everything else to move your application forward. The Court sees mandamus as a last resort, and if you skip these preliminary steps, your application could be dismissed for not giving IRCC a fair chance to act.

Here are the key actions you should take beforehand:

1. Contact IRCC via Webform

Use the IRCC online webform to ask for updates about your application. Be polite, clear, and include your full name, UCI, application number, and the reason for your inquiry. It proves to the court that you’ve requested action and have not received a meaningful response.

2. Call IRCC by Phone

Sometimes the call center agents have slightly more information than what’s visible on your online tracker. You can call IRCC at 1-888-242-2100 (from inside Canada). You might receive verbal confirmation that your file is “non-routine” or under “security screening.” Document the date, time, and content of the call.

3. Contact Your Local Member of Parliament (MP)

Reach out to your local MP and ask for assistance. Most MPs have a dedicated immigration caseworker who can contact IRCC on your behalf and get internal updates. Responses from MPs often contain more detailed information than what’s sent to applicants. It also shows you’ve tried multiple channels before escalating legally.

4. Order Your GCMS Notes

Request your Global Case Management System (GCMS) notes using ATIP (Access to Information and Privacy). These notes reveal what’s happening internally with your file. It’s strongly recommended to request your GCMS notes from CBSA. CBSA often does not redact security-related information, unlike IRCC which frequently censors it.

5. Sending a Demand Letter to IRCC

This was my final step before applying for a mandamus in Federal Court, it is a best practice—and often an implicit requirement—to send a formal demand letter to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC). This letter serves as official notice to the Minister that you expect a decision within a reasonable time.

A demand letter (also called a “request for action”) is a written request asking IRCC to render a decision within a defined period—typically 15 to 30 days. It is not a court filing, but it is essential for the legal test of mandamus, especially when trying to prove you made a request and received no reasonable response (refusal, delay, or silence).

A demande letter model is available here: demand-letter.txt. Read carefully this letter, put your information and send it through IRCC web form. Keep a screenshot of the webform filled and a PDF of the confirmation email.

Understanding the Judicial Framework

Before initiating the mandamus process, it’s important to understand that Federal Court procedures—including mandamus applications—are strictly governed by the Federal Courts Rules. These rules outline the structure, format, and strict deadlines for every step of the judicial review process. Compliance is mandatory. A simple mistake in timing, form, or service could lead to delays or dismissal of the case.

That said, you don’t have to read or understand all those rules yourself. This article was carefully written in compliance with the Federal Courts Rules.

Let’s take a step back and look at the full path your mandamus application will follow. The Federal Court has published a helpful procedural roadmap for judicial review applications related to citizenship—which also applies in mandamus situations when IRCC fails to act.

Here’s a simplified explanation of the full process step-by-step:

1. Applicant Files and Serves the Application for Leave and for Judicial Review: This is the official start of your case. You initiate a mandamus proceeding in Federal Court (FC) by fill your ALJR and serving it electronically to the FC.

2. Applicant Serves Proof of Service: Once the application is served to the FC, you file an Affidavit of Service to confirm that the documents were properly delivered. But we will skip this step because the Rule 9 kicks in automatically after a few weeks and the Court sends a notice to IRCC asking whether a decision has been made.

3. Respondent Serves a Notice of Appearance: Within 10 days of service, the DOJ must submit a Notice of Appearance, indicating they will participate in the proceedings to defend IRCC.

4. Registry Requests Written Reasons from the Tribunal: After receiving the Notice of Appearance, the Court applies Federal Court Rule 9, requesting IRCC to explain why no decision has been made.

5. Tribunal Provides a “No Decision Letter”: In response to Rule 9, IRCC submits a letter through DOJ stating that no decision has been made yet, and explaining their position.

6. Applicant Files and Serves the Applicant’s Record: Within 75 days of receiving the “Decision and Reasons Letter,” the applicant must file the Applicant’s Record, including legal arguments, evidence, and supporting documents.

7. Respondent Files and Serves the Memorandum of Argument: The DOJ responds with its Memorandum of Argument, stating why IRCC believes there is no unreasonable delay or legal obligation breached.

8. Applicant Serves the Reply Memorandum: The applicant may submit a Reply Memorandum within 10 days to respond to the DOJ’s arguments.

9. Federal Court Grants or Rejects Leave to Proceed: The judge reviews all submissions and decides whether the case has sufficient merit to proceed to a full hearing. If granted, it moves to the judicial review hearing stage.

Now, if you’re feeling overwhelmed by the legal terms or unsure about how the process works, that’s totally normal — this isn’t something most people deal with every day. The good news is: you don’t need to understand everything right away. In the next sections, we’ll walk through each step of the mandamus process in clear, simple terms, using real examples, practical advice, and links when needed. By the end of this guide, you’ll not only understand how it all works — you’ll also feel confident taking action if you decide to move forward.

Step 1 – Application for Leave and for Judicial Review (ALJR)

If IRCC fails to act within the time provided in your demand letter, the next step is to formally initiate a mandamus proceeding in Federal Court by filing an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review. The objective is not to present your full argument or evidence yet — you’re simply asking the Court for permission (“leave”) to proceed with your application for judicial review.

A template can be found here application-for-leave-and-for-judicial-review-mandamus.docx download and open it in Microsoft Word. Carefully review and modify the highlighted sections of the template as outlined below:

Page 1 – Applicant Information:

• At the top of the page, replace the placeholder with your full legal name in uppercase letters (e.g., JOHN DOE).

Page 2 – Parties and Contact Information:

• Respondent (IRCC Office): If you know the IRCC office that first handled your citizenship application, enter its name and address. You can usually find this on Page 1 of your GCMS notes. If you’re unsure, you may leave Sydney as the default. A complete list of IRCC office addresses is available here: IRCC Offices in Canada (You do not need to include phone numbers or email addresses.)
• Applicant Information: Update the fields with your Citizenship Application Number, your UCI (Unique Client Identifier) and your current residential address.
• Service of Documents: provide your primary email address (This will be the official channel for all future communications you receive from the Federal Court and the Department of Justice).

Page 3 – Application History:

• From paragraphs 2 to 8, enter details specific to your case, including: Your personal informations and key dates related to your citizenship application (e.g., submission date, test date, any completed steps)

Page 4 – Court Location and Declaration:

• In paragraph 17, specify: The city of the nearest Federal Court to you, where a hearing would take place if needed.
• Your preferred official language: English or French
• Today’s current date
• Your full name and signature

Page 5 – Court Registry Address:

• Replace the placeholder address with the mailing address of your nearest Federal Court. Full list available here: Federal Court Registry Offices

Save your completed document as a PDF, sign Page 4 (digitally or by hand). That’s it, your application is now ready to be served to the Federal Court.

Once your form is complete, visit the Federal Court’s e-filing portal and upload your document following the steps outlined in this video tutorial

A few days after submitting your ALJR, the Federal Court will send you a payment link. You’ll need to pay a $50 filing fee. Once the payment is processed, you’ll receive an acceptance email from the Court Registry confirming that your Application for Leave and for Judicial Review (ALJR) has been accepted. This email contain a link to download the stamped copy of your ALJR.

Don’t worry if there’s no gold seal — the Federal Court doesn’t apply a physical stamp for electronically filed applications. Instead, you’ll find a digital stamp in the top-right corner of the first page. It’s a black square containing details such as your case number (T-****-**) and the name of the registry officer who accepted your filing.

Using your case number (T-****-**), you can track the progress of your file with the Federal Court. Visit the Court Files page and select the “Search by court number” tab. Enter your case number and click “Submit”. A table with your case details will appear. On the right side, under the “More” column, click the blue magnifying glass icon. This will open a detailed list of all activities and filings related to your case at the Federal Court.

At this stage:

• The FC Registry will send a request to IRCC, asking for a copy of the decision and reasons.
• Within approximately 10 days, IRCC will send the decision and reasons letter to you and the FC Registry. Confirming that no final decision has been issued.
• Simultaneously, the Department of Justice (DOJ) will serve a Notice of Appearance, indicating that they intend to oppose your application and represent IRCC in the proceedings. You will also receive a copy of this document by email.

Once you have received the Decision and Reasons Letter, you must begin Perfecting your Application for Leave, which we will explain in detail in the next section.

Step 2 – Perfecting your Application for Leave and for Judicial Review

Once you receive the “Decision and Reasons Letter”, you enter the stage of perfecting your application. This is where you submit the complete Applicant’s Record, which includes all the legal arguments, facts, and evidence supporting your request for judicial review. You have 75 days from the date you receive the “Decision and Reasons Letter” to file this record.

This step is where you show the Court that:

1. IRCC has a legal duty to decide
2. You made reasonable efforts to prompt IRCC
3. The delay has caused serious prejudice
4. There was an unreasonable delay

Again, if we fail to convince the judge of ANY of those 4 factors the mandamus may be reject!

The Applicant’s Record is a bundle of specific documents submitted together as one PDF. It must follow the format and order required by the Federal Courts Rules.

Here’s what it must include (in this exact order):

1. Table of Contents: An organized index of all the documents in the Applicant’s Record with their page numbers. For a digital file, consider making the entries clickable (bookmarked) to help navigation. Each section listed below should appear in your table of contents.

2. Application for Leave and for Judicial Review (ALJR): This is the original application you filed in Step 1. It includes the factual background of your case, the decision you’re seeking, and your preferred court language. You must insert the stamped version you previously received from the court (check your email, you will find a confirmation of accepted document sent from FC that contain a link to download the stamped version of your ALJR).

3. Decision and Reasons Letter: This is the official response submitted by IRCC (via DOJ) following the Court’s Rule 9 request. It typically says something like “no decision has yet been made” and gives a brief explanation for the delay.

4. Affidavit(s) and Exhibits: Your sworn statement (affidavit) is the main factual support for your application. It must clearly describe: The full timeline of your application, all your efforts to get updates (webforms, calls, MP contact, etc.), the impact of the delay on your life.

After the affidavit, include all supporting exhibits, properly labeled and organized (e.g., “Exhibit A – GCMS Notes,” “Exhibit B – IRCC Webform Response,” etc.). You can insert divider pages between exhibits for clarity.

5. Memorandum of Argument: This is the legal portion of your application where you lay out the arguments explaining why IRCC’s delay is unreasonable and why mandamus should be granted. It includes: A concise statement of facts, a list of legal issues to be decided, an argument section with references to jurisprudence (past cases) and legal tests, short conclusion asking the Court for relief.

6. Language Statement: A simple one-line statement confirming your choice of language for the proceedings (English or French). This is a formality but must be included at the end of your record.

Now you have an idea what we will prepare for this step, let’s dive into details without delais. Download the applicant record zip file here: applicants-record.zip and unzip it.

• On Windows: Right-click the file and choose Extract All.
• On Mac: Double-click on the file.

Now you have a folder that contain, the same steps that we talked about early in order:

• 00-table-of-content.docx: The cover page and table of contents template we’ll edit.
• 01-aljr.pdf: The ALJR application stamped by the court (replace by yours).
• 02-decision-and-reasons.pdf: The Rule 9 response from IRCC (replace by yours).
• 03- affidavit-of-applicant.docx: The affidavit template we’ll edit.
• 03-affidavit-of-applicant/: A folder with example exhibits (replace by yours).
• 04-memorandum.docx: The legal memorandum template we’ll edit.
• 05-language-statement.docx: The language statement template we’ll edit.

Prepare the Applicant’s Record:

1. Start with “00-table-of-content.docx”:

Update the highlighted fields on the cover page with your personal details. Leave the table of contents itself as-is for now.

2. Replace “01-aljr.pdf” and “02-decision-and-reasons.pdf“:

Use the PDFs you received from the Federal Court and IRCC. Keep the filenames or at least maintain the prefix (e.g., 01-, 02-) for clarity.

3. Prepare Your Exhibits:

• Exhibit A: Merge your Acknowledgment of Receipt (AOR) and a screenshot of your application status tracker. Replace “Exhibit-A-aor-and-status.pdf”.
• Exhibit B: Replace “Exhibit-B-atip-gcms-notes.pdf” with your most recent GCMS notes (preferably from CBSA).
• Exhibit C: Replace “Exhibit-C-mp-emails.pdf” with your email exchanges with your MP.
• Exhibit D: Replace “Exhibit-D-processing-time.pdf” with a screenshot of current IRCC processing times.

Other exhibits:

• Exhibit E: Medical reports or letters from doctors.
• Exhibit F: Job offers requiring Canadian citizenship.

In most successful cases I reviewed (including mine), affidavits were used to support claims of prejudice.

Before we continue, open again “00-table-of-content.docx“, put the new exhibits in the Table of Content (put new row after the other exhibits for every new exhibit).

4. Draft Your Affidavit:

Open “03-affidavit-of-applicant.docx” and carefully replace all highlighted sections with your personal details, make the it reflect you application timeline, the template here is just an example. Add new paragraphs for each exhibit.

You need to notarize the affidavit and their exhibit. You can notarize them in the nearby Federal Court for FREE. Otherwise you can go for a private notary or an online notary (I recommend Canada Notary or ATIS, we received a positive feedback regarding them). Note: Don’t sign your documents yet, you will sign them before the notary.

6. Finalize the Language Statement:

Open “05-language-statement.docx” document, and replace the highlighted text by your informations, sign the document export to PDF.

7. Final Assembly:

At this stage, we will merge all the documents in the correct order, add bookmarks and hyperlinks, add page numbers, insert the final version of your table of contents. This part is difficult to explain by text — refer to the accompanying video tutorial for the final assembly steps.

Serving the Applicant’s Record to the Department of Justice (DOJ)

Once your Applicant’s Record is finalized and filed with the Federal Court, you must serve a copy to the DOJ (who represents IRCC in the proceedings). This is a mandatory step.

Which email address should you use for service?

To determine the correct DOJ email address for service, follow these steps:

1. Check the Notice of Appearance

Carefully read the Notice of Appearance you received from the DOJ. Most of the time, you will find a line like:

“Electronic service of documents is accepted at [email@example.com].”

This is the preferred email address for serving all future documents.

2. If no dedicated service email is listed

Scroll down to the signature section (usually bottom-right). If there’s an email address listed there, you may use it for service.

3. If no email is listed at all

Use the email address that sent you the Notice of Appearance.

Next, you need to serve your Applicant’s Record to the Department of Justice (DOJ) by email and request confirmation of receipt.

Here’s an example of a service email: service-applicants-record.txt

Attach your finalized Applicant’s Record PDF file to the email and send it to the service address.

After sending the email, save a copy of the sent message (and the confirmation reply, if any) as a PDF.
Once you’ve served your Applicant’s Record to the Department of Justice (DOJ) by email, the next step is to file proof of that service with the Federal Court. This proof is called the Affidavit of Service.

Prepare the Affidavit of service

If your case is handled by the Federal Court in Montreal or Ottawa, an affidavit of service is not mandatory. Instead, you can:

1. Save the email you sent to the DOJ with your Applicant’s Record attached.
2. Include the automatic reply or the confirmation email received from the DOJ lawyer.
3. Combine those into a single PDF — this will serve as your Affidavit of Service.

If your case is filed outside Montreal or Ottawa, you must prepare a formal Affidavit of Service, here’s the steps:

1. Download the template here: affidavit-of-service.docx
2. Open the document and replace all highlighted text with your case details:
   • Your full name
   • Your court file number
   • The email address you used to serve the DOJ
   • The date and time the email was sent
3. Save the email you used to serve the Applicant’s Record as Exhibit A (PDF).
4. Print and notarize both the affidavit and Exhibit A. You can do this for FREE at the Federal Court Registry, or use an online notary service like Canada Notary or ATIS. Remember: don’t sign anything until you’re in front of the notary.

Serve applicant’s record and affidavit of service to FC website

You should already be familiar with how to file documents online if you’ve completed Step 1. Here’s a the steps to serve the applicant’s record and the affidavit of service:

1. Visit the FC: https://efiling.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/online-access/e-filing-intro
2. Select the check box “By checking this box, I confirm that I understand and agree to all Federal Court E-Filing Terms and Conditions above. (required)“.
3. Click on the second button “Submit document(s) to an existing proceeding”.
4. Type your case number (T-****-**) on the field “Court File Number (required)” and click “Next“.
5. This page show the court file, don’t do anything, just click “Next“.
6. This page show the Parties, don’t do anything, just click “Next“.
7. Now under “Document file (required)” click “Browse” and select your applicant’s record PDF file.
8. For “Document type (required)” select “APPLICATION RECORD“.
9. For “Language (required)” select “English“.
10. For “Filing party / parties (required)” select the checkbox before “Your Name“.
11. Under “Document handling instructions” type “Applicant’s record of You First and Last Name”.
12. Click on “Add another document“.
13. For “Document file (required)” click “Browse” and select your affidavit of service PDF file.
14. For “Document type (required)” select “AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE“.
15. For “Language (required)” select “English“.
16. For “Filing party / parties (required)” select the checkbox before “Your Name“.
17. Under “Document handling instructions” type “Affidavit of Service of the applicant’s record to the Respondents”.
18. Click “Next“.
19. Fill your contact informations then click “Next“.
20. Review your submission, and click “Submit“.

Voilà, that’s it.

What’s next?

In about 7 business days, you’ll receive a confirmation email from the Federal Court Registry confirming the receipt and filing of your documents. Within 30 days, the DOJ will serve their Memorandum of Argument, defending IRCC’s position. From that date you’ll have only 10 days to file your Reply Memorandum, which is your final step before the judge reviews your case and decides whether to grant or reject leave for judicial review.

In the next section, we’ll walk through how to prepare your Reply Memorandum with clear examples and guidance.

Step 3 – Reply to the Respondent’s Memorandum of Argument

The Department of Justice (DOJ) — which represents IRCC — is required to submit a Memorandum of Argument in 30 days after receiving the Applicant’s Record.

This document is the DOJ’s official response to your mandamus application. It outlines their legal position and defends IRCC’s delay. The DOJ will usually argue that:

• IRCC does not owe a legal duty to finalize your file at this stage (often citing the background check or security screening as still in progress);
• You have not demonstrated sufficient prejudice caused by the delay;
• The delay is not unreasonable given the circumstances (they may compare it to other cases);

The DOJ will often cite past Federal Court decisions (jurisprudence) to support its position and argue that your situation does not meet the test for mandamus.

The DOJ’s Memorandum is not the final word — you will have the chance to reply with your Reply Memorandum within 10 days, and it’s your opportunity to dismantle their arguments point by point.

Since your Reply Memorandum must directly address the specific arguments raised by the DOJ in their Memorandum of Argument, it’s difficult to provide a one-size-fits-all template. Every case is unique, and your response must be tailored accordingly.

I’ve prepared a generic Reply Memorandum that fits most standard mandamus cases involving delayed citizenship applications. It covers the most common arguments raised by the DOJ — including those related to background checks, lack of prejudice, and IRCC’s legal duty to act.

Download the reply memorandum here: reply-to-respondent-memorandum-of-argument.docx

Next, I’ll walk you through this draft reply and show you exactly how to adapt and customize it based on the facts of your own case.

Paragraph 1. In this paragraph you agrees with the Respondent’s summary of the facts as outlined in paragraphs [X] to [Y] under the “Statement of Facts” section of his Memorandum of Argument, as they accurately reflect the procedural history of the application. Similarly, you concurs with the legal principles outlined in paragraphs [Y] to [Z] under the “Law and Argument” section, which summarize the applicable test for mandamus as established by the Federal Court jurisprudence. Replace the paragraph numbers highlighted with the actual paragraph numbers from the Memorandum of Argument you received. These numbers may vary depending on your specific case. Always double-check before submitting your reply.

Paragraph 2. In this paragraph you challenges all other claims. Keep it as it.

Paragraph 6 – 12: Now we will try to show why the case(s) used by the DOJ do not apply to your specific situation. I put the most used cases, but check if they are present in your respondent memorandum of argument otherwise remove it.

Paragraph 13 – 16: Our statement of fact, avoid repeating information already provided. Keep it brief, as the full details have been thoroughly outlined in the Applicant’s Record.

Remaining Sections of the Document:

This part is focused on reinforcing your case with legal references and jurisprudence, especially tailored for applicants stuck in Security Screening (SS). Review it carefully and adjust the content to match your specific situation. Everything should be clear at this point.

Once completed, serve the reply to the DOJ, fill out your Affidavit of Service, and submit both documents to the Federal Court. By now, you’re familiar with the process — but if you need a refresher, just refer back to Step 2 of this article.

Final Word

I want to express my deep gratitude to the many people who contributed—directly or indirectly—to the creation of this post. Most of them I’ve never met, and I don’t even know their real names. Yet, through shared documents, late-night messages, and quiet acts of support, we exchanged knowledge, stood together, and helped each other navigate one of the most difficult chapters of our lives. Thank you for your courage, your generosity, and your solidarity.

Buy me a coffee 🙂

Found this guide helpful? Consider buying me a coffee to support the work behind it. It keeps this content up to date.