Can You Get Costs When a Visa Mandamus Case Becomes Moot?

What Is a Mandamus Application in Canadian Immigration?

A mandamus application asks the Federal Court to order a government decision-maker to act. In immigration, that usually means asking the court to compel an officer to decide a visa or permit application that has been pending for a long time. The court generally looks at whether there is a legal duty to decide and whether the delay is unreasonable.

Our Ontario immigration lawyers advise clients on whether a delayed application may justify a mandamus application.

What Happened in This Case?

In Hyder v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 1253 (CanLII), the applicant had waited almost four years for a decision on his temporary resident (visitor) visa. He applied to the Federal Court for mandamus to compel a decision, and had to travel to Singapore for an in-person interview.

The visa was granted on August 13, 2026. The Minister had brought a motion under section 87 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to protect redacted information in the certified tribunal record. On September 8, 2026, the court held that motion in abeyance, ordered that the record did not need to be produced at all because the case was moot, and ordered that the redacted information remain protected.

On September 10, 2026, the Minister filed a written motion under Rule 369 of the Federal Courts Rules for judgment dismissing the application. The applicant did not oppose the motion but asked for costs. On October 9, 2026, the court granted the motion, dismissed the application for leave and judicial review, and awarded no costs.

Why Did the Court Refuse Costs?

Under Rule 22 of the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules, costs are not awarded in these applications unless the court finds special reasons. The court said costs have been awarded in moot mandamus cases, but the threshold is high.

The applicant argued that the delay was unreasonable and unexplained, that he had to go to court to get a decision, and that the Minister’s conduct prolonged the litigation, including delay in producing the record, a vacated hearing date, errors in the section 87 motion materials, and a request to discontinue sent to the wrong address.

Justice Kane rejected those arguments. She acknowledged the almost four-year wait and the costs the applicant incurred, but found the delay was justified by the nature of the security screening that was required and conducted. The Minister was required to protect sensitive information and could not be faulted for the section 87 motion or for rescheduling the hearing to allow redactions. The clerical errors were not fatal and caused no confusion or prejudice. The court also noted that the applicant strongly opposed the section 87 motion even after he had received his visa, and that his travel to Singapore would have been needed in any event for the interview.

Did Going to Court Make the Government Decide?

The applicant said it did. The court called that speculation, because the record showed his visa application was already being processed and was awaiting the security assessment. Whether a mandamus application is worth bringing depends on the facts of each file, including the reasons for the delay.

If you are dealing with a refused or delayed work permit, our work permit refusals and delays page explains how we can help.

What Is a Section 87 Motion?

Section 87 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act lets the Minister ask the court to protect information in a judicial review, applying the protections in section 83. Under section 83(1), the judge must protect information whose disclosure would be injurious to international relations, national defence or national security, or would endanger the safety of any person. In this case the redacted record also explained the reason for the delay. In its September 8, 2026 order, the court declined to award the applicant costs for the section 87 motion, noting that the Minister promptly told the court and the applicant that the record required review and served the motion before filing it.

What Does Mootness Mean for Your Immigration Case?

Mootness means there is no longer a live dispute for the court to decide. If your application is approved while a mandamus case is pending, the order you asked for is no longer needed, as happened here. If your application is refused instead, you would generally need to consider a separate challenge to the refusal. Our judicial review practice can explain how a change in your file affects a Federal Court application.

Questions and Records to Discuss with a Lawyer

• How long has your visa or permit application been pending, and what has the processing office told you?
• Has the government given any reason for the delay, such as security screening?
• What legal costs have you incurred, and what conduct by the government, if any, might support special reasons for costs?
• If your application is approved or refused while a Federal Court case is underway, what are the next steps?
• Are there deadlines for challenging a refusal in your situation?

If you have questions about a delayed immigration application or a Federal Court proceeding, reach out to UL Lawyers through /connect to discuss your circumstances.

---

This article is automated commentary on a public court decision and is for general information only — not legal advice. Decisions rely on facts unique to each case. If you are affected by a similar issue, contact a lawyer for advice specific to your situation.