Judicial Review

On this page, we cover the essentials of a judicial review to overturn a refusal by IRCC.

What is a judicial review?

Judicial review is a legal process where the Federal Court examines the actions of a decision-maker, such as Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).

By filing an application for leave and judicial review, you can challenge unreasonable or incorrect decisions made by IRCC. This includes refusals of study permits, work permits, Express Entry applications, sponsorships, and other final decisions.

If your judicial review is successful, the Federal Court will overturn the decision. IRCC will reopen your application and assign it to a different immigration officer for reconsideration.

To succeed in a judicial review, you typically need to demonstrate that the decision is unreasonable. The Federal Court generally applies the standard of review known as "reasonableness," unless there are violations of natural justice or procedural fairness. The court assesses whether the decision is logically consistent, supported by a rational analysis, and justifiable based on relevant facts and laws.

Within the reasonableness standard, IRCC is granted deference, meaning the court is hesitant to overturn their decision or substitute its own judgment. As long as the decision falls within a range of acceptable outcomes, it will be considered reasonable.

It's worth noting that immigration consultants are not authorized to provide legal advice, such as assessing the likelihood of a success judicial review, or file for judicial reviews on your behalf.

What are successful examples of judicial reviews at Marin Immigration Law?

Below is a short list of real examples that lead to a successful judicial review:

• An Applicant applied to extend their Post-Graduate Work Permit under a Temporary Public Policy. IRCC rejected the application since IRCC erroneously found that the Applicant previously extended their PGWP under another Temporary Public Policy. The judicial review was successful, the application was reopened, and the applicant was issued their PGWP.
• An Applicant was refused more than five times for a visitor visa (Temporary Resident Visa). IRCC continuously provided generic reasons for the refusals without considering the Applicant’s circumstances. An application was filed, and a settlement was reached. IRCC reopened the file, and the visitor visa was approved.
• An Applicant applied for a study permit, but they were rejected on numerous reasons. IRCC’s reasons were generic. They used “Chinook” to generate vague reasons for the refusals and failed to consider the Applicant’s situation. An application for judicial review was filed. Since IRCC made findings contrary to the evidence submit, the judicial review was successful and IRCC approved the study permit without reopening the file.
• An Applicant updated their permanent residency application by webform. They provided updated forms and more information for their application. IRCC rejected the application for failing to provide documents, but these documents were provided by webform months earlier. An application for judicial review was filed. The application as successful and IRCC continued to process the permanent residency file.

Every case is different. Typically, if IRCC has made a mistake (or multiple mistakes), there will be a high chance of success. However, not every application for leave and judicial review is successful. Some are rejected.

‍What are the main steps in a judicial review?

To initiate a judicial review, you must first seek permission from the Federal Court by filing an application for leave and judicial review. This application serves as a notice to the court that you wish to proceed with a judicial review. We will outline the relevant facts and provide a short summary of the grounds for our arguments. In response, the Department of Justice (DOJ), which serves as the lawyers for IRCC, will provide a notice of appearance, indicating their intention to respond to your application for leave.

At this point, we will wait for IRCC to send the Rule 9 reasons. This is similar to the GCMS notes and it will contain all the reasons for the refusal. In some cases, the Rule 9 reasons are different from the refusal letter that you received from IRCC.

Officer decision notes are not the Rule 9 reasons

Since July 2025 IRCC has sent an officer decision note (ODN) with most temporary resident refusals, and since 26 May 2026 with most permanent residence refusals as well. Electronic travel authorizations, temporary resident permits and humanitarian and compassionate applications are not covered. The note arrives as a separate letter alongside the refusal letter and sets out why the officer refused the application.

It is easy to assume the note is the full reasons. It is not. IRCC removes portions of the note where it considers the information secure, private or otherwise sensitive under access to information and privacy legislation, and on 28 August 2026 it confirmed in writing to the immigration bar that the note is not sufficient to be used for Rule 9 purposes.

IRCC’s own instruction, now published on its website, is that when you apply to the Federal Court for leave and judicial review you should indicate that you have not received the reasons for the refusal, even if you received an officer decision note. That is what allows the Court to request the complete reasons under Rule 9 of the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules and to see whether anything was removed from the note.

We request the Rule 9 reasons on every file. They routinely contain material the note leaves out, including the officer’s full notes, the processing history, and whether an automated triage tool was used. Arguing from the note alone means arguing against an edited version of a decision the Court will eventually read in full.

Deadlines and extensions of time

Two different clocks run in a judicial review, and they are often confused with each other.

Filing the application. This deadline has not changed. You have 15 days from receiving the decision if the matter arises in Canada, and 60 days if it arises outside Canada. Filing late requires a motion for an extension of time. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act lets a judge extend the time for special reasons, and the Court generally asks whether you had a continuing intention to bring the application, whether there is a reasonable explanation for the delay, whether the case has some merit, and whether the delay prejudices the Minister. Extensions are granted, but they are not routine.

Perfecting the record. Rule 10 gives 30 days to file the applicant’s record, and the Federal Court’s Special Order on the leave backlog adds a standing 90-day extension, so the working deadline is 120 days from filing the application, or 120 days after the tribunal’s reasons arrive, whichever is later. The Court amended that Special Order on 12 August 2026 to set out why the extension exists and to make clear that anything beyond it now requires a formal motion supported by extraordinary or unforeseeable circumstances. Treat the 120th day as a hard stop.

Once the Rule 9 reasons are received, we will need to provide the Applicant’s Memorandum of Argument. This document contains affidavits, exhibits, legal research and arguments aimed at persuading a judge that IRCC's decision is unreasonable.

IRCC, represented by a DOJ lawyer, will also have an opportunity to provide their own memorandum of argument. We will have the chance to provide a final reply.

As previously mentioned, it is crucial to obtain leave from a judge in order to proceed with the judicial review. Once the Rule 9 reasons are provided and all the arguments are filed by both parties, a judge will review them based on the written submissions. The judge holds significant discretion in deciding whether to grant your application for leave.

The majority of applications for leave are rejected by a judge. Therefore, it is crucial to thoroughly prepare, conduct research, and present persuasive arguments in your memorandums of argument to increase your chances of obtaining leave.

If leave is granted, a hearing will be scheduled, and oral arguments can proceed. Generally, new evidence is not allowed during the judicial review. The judge will examine the evidence that was presented to the immigration officer at the time of the decision, as well as review the reasoning behind the decision and its application of the law. Following the hearing, the court will issue a decision, which can take anywhere from one to six months depending on the complexity of the case.

This is a general overview, and it is important to adhere to specific rules and deadlines throughout the proceedings. It is recommended to seek the assistance of an immigration lawyer with litigation experience to conduct research, present arguments, and properly prepare your application for judicial review.

Why should Marin Immigration Law represent you?

Cédric Marin was a law clerk at the Federal Court of Canada. He has advised judges on both immigration and refugee matters for judicial reviews. In addition, Cédric Marin was a decision-maker at the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, where he decided hundreds of applications for the Government of Canada.

You are not retaining a sole practitioner. Federal Court files are led by Cédric Marin together with Harleen Kaur Chadha, an associate lawyer whose practice covers complex immigration litigation, including Federal Court judicial reviews and mandamus. A second lawyer at the firm reviews the applicant's record before it is filed.

At Marin Immigration Law, we represent applicants and file applications for leave and judicial review at the Federal Court. For clients at the Federal Court of Canada, we have successfully overturned refusals of Temporary Resident Visas (TRVs) including Super Visas, work permits including Post-Graduate Work Permits (PGWPs), study permits (SDS and non-SDS), and permanent residence including Express Entry, Provincial Nominee Programs.

What to expect during a consultation?

Cédric Marin will discuss your initial application, any previous refusals, the reasons for the refusal and explore any mistakes made by IRCC. We will explore all options to receive an approval, including a judicial review, strengthening your application and reapplying, a reconsideration request or changing programs.