Its more than a year in court and no test yet.... vow.... seems there is no value shown either for the application or for the court.
Can i know which lawyer are you using for mandamus as some of us might need this kind of route at worst case scenario?
Hi, I'm wondering if you might be able to share your experience with the Mandamus application and whether it is worth filing for it? Thanks.
Some Observations For Context:
As I have previously observed in this topic, and elsewhere, the application for Mandamus is an EXCEPTIONAL remedy. It is a narrow, limited, and typically difficult to obtain remedy.
In respect to grant citizenship applications, the length of time an application has been pending does NOT provide grounds for Mandamus. There is no timeline within which IRCC must process a grant citizenship application. While remarkably long delays can be considered, as a factor, in determining whether a Writ of Mandamus should be issued, the amount of time itself is NOT a basis for issuing Mandamus.
There is a tendency in this forum to judge delays in processing based on routine, or relatively uncomplicated non-routine, processing timelines. Processing timelines dragging into two plus or three plus years, are often attacked as unreasonable, unacceptable, and constituting grounds for judicial intervention. In contrast, over the years I have oft cited cases taking FOUR plus years, and occasionally cases taking six, eight, or more years. The wheels of justice tend to turn rather slowly. Especially when there are no requirements in regards to how long this or that process should take.
In the current bureaucratic environment, in which Covid-19 has more or less ploughed norms asunder, timelines are going long, long, longer, and much longer. Even for the most routinely processed applications, it will not be surprising if the median timeline approaches or exceeds two years. For applications encountering non-routine processing, the timelines are almost certainly going to go past two years, perhaps three, and for the more complex and involved types of non-routine processing (those involving RQ-related issues, and those with security-related snags, in particular), two to three years would be an optimistic estimate, with rather more than a few likely to be bogged down three to four years. Some even longer.
While it is an extremely unusual case, just to put timelines into context, consider the application for citizenship made by Mahmoud Sharafaldin, whose case I have previously discussed (more than a year ago) in this topic:
Which brings this back around to the individual whose citizenship application was made TWENTY YEARS ago. And his application for Mandamus which was scheduled for a Federal Court hearing December 2, 2019. While generally the courts are allowing IRCC to suspend citizenship application processing pending inquiry (let alone actual proceedings) as to PR-refugee cessation, in the two cases involving Mr. Sharafaldin, whose citizenship application for citizenship has been pending for twenty years, it is the RPD which has postponed cessation proceedings pending the outcome of the citizenship case. And in Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Sharafaldin, 2019 FC 1168 (CanLII),
http://canlii.ca/t/j2cx1 the Federal Court sustained the RPD's decision to wait for the outcome of the citizenship application (referencing the December 2, 2019 hearing date for the citizenship mandamus case).
STILL NO DECISION for Mr. Sharafaldin's citizenship application, which was made in 1999, MORE than 21 Years ago.
Mr. Sharafaldin's application for a Writ of Mandamus to compel IRCC to make a decision on his citizenship application was made in January 2019. Two years later the Federal Court has so far only decided what redacted information in the Certified Tribunal Record should be shared with Mr. Sharafaldin's counsel. Otherwise, citizenship application is still pending. Otherwise, the application for Mandamus made January 2019 is still pending.
Citation and links to Sharafaldin's case:
The previous Federal Court decision is here: Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Sharafaldin, 2019 FC 1168
https://canlii.ca/t/j2cx1
It can take awhile. Sometimes a long, long while.
For @gamzoog in particular: As already (and many times before) noted, Mandamus is a narrow, very limited remedy, and as such its availability very much depends on the particulars of the case. Mandamus for citizenship application cases is a totally different beast, for example, than Mandamus for any other kind of proceeding, including immigration. How it goes for
@Fallen_Warrior, for example, will reveal near NOTHING about how an application for Mandamus in regards to CEC applications might go. Frankly, how it goes for
@Fallen_Warrior will not reveal much about how it is likely to go even in other citizenship application cases.
Whether pursuing the remedy of Mandamus in the Federal Court is "worthwhile" is far, far more dependent on the facts of the particular case, including of course what the case is about (citizenship application versus, say, an application for PR). BUT even relative to the same kind of application, whether seeking Mandamus relief is worthwhile is still intensely dependent on the individual facts and circumstances in that specific case.
That said, as a general matter, it warrants emphasizing again that Mandamus is an EXCEPTIONAL remedy, so in most cases it is NOT worth pursuing. IF Mandamus is worth pursuing, that almost always requires a LAWYER . . . even lawyers tend to have difficulty navigating the complexities of properly bringing an application for the Writ of Mandamus. Thus, for someone who believes they have a case that is ripe for Mandamus, the way to assess whether it is worth pursuing is to PAY for an in-depth, real case evaluation consultation with a reliable LAWYER, who can review all the facts, and do so in strict confidence, and who can be trusted to offer a well-founded opinion about the merits of pursuing Mandamus.
It also warrants REMEMBERING that to bring an application for Mandamus, a proper demand must be made that the government body or official (typically the respective Minister) take the action that the law clearly mandates they must take. Composing and submitting such a demand is an absolute prerequisite to making a valid claim for Mandamus, and if that demand is well-founded, more often than not the government body or official will proceed accordingly, so that it will not be necessary to actually file an application for Mandamus. In other words, if the law is on the side of the Mandamus, the demand will usually be sufficient incentive for the Minister to act. The demand is, perhaps, the most important element in pursuing Mandamus. Demands submitted
pro se (without a lawyer) typically fail to adequately meet the requirements. To make an effective demand, for all but a remarkable few individuals, really requires a lawyer. But what this really means is that a person does not need to fully invest in paying a lawyer to pursue a full blown Mandamus case, but should be able to hire a lawyer to make the demand and see how that goes before deciding whether to proceed with filing an action in the Federal Court.
SUMMARY for determining if it is worthwhile to pursue Mandamus:
-- identify the specific act that the Minister is absolutely required to do under the law (most will need a lawyer's assistance even at this preliminary stage)
-- consult with competent, reputable lawyer, paid to do an in-depth analysis to assess whether it is worthwhile making a demand the Minister take that action, and if so
-- proceed with making the demand
