When applying for Canadian immigration, whether it’s for permanent residency, a work permit, or another visa category, one of the most critical aspects of the process is adhering to deadlines set by Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC“). Missing a deadline can have serious consequences, including delays, application rejections, or even being barred from applying again for a certain period. Here’s why meeting these deadlines is crucial to the success of your immigration application.
Avoiding Application Rejections
IRCC enforces strict deadlines to ensure that applications move through the process efficiently. Failing to submit required documents or information on time could result in the rejection of your application as incomplete. Once an application is rejected, the entire process must be restarted, which can cost time, money, and opportunity.
For example, submitting your proof of funds, police certificates, or medical exams after the deadline may lead to IRCC refusing your application, regardless of how strong your case is otherwise. Even a simple oversight can have significant consequences.
Preventing Unnecessary Delays
Submitting everything before the deadline ensures that your application progresses without delays. Any delay on your part can cause IRCC to pause your application while waiting for missing information. The Canadian immigration system already has lengthy processing times, and you don’t want to extend the wait time by not meeting the deadlines.
Maintaining Legal Status
For those already in Canada on temporary status, such as work or study permits, missing a deadline for submitting an extension or renewal application can lead to losing your legal status. If your permit expires before you submit a renewal application, you could be forced to leave Canada or apply for restoration, which is a much more complicated and risky process.
Ensuring Timely Communication
IRCC often sends requests for additional information or documentation with strict deadlines. Ignoring or missing these deadlines can result in your application being refused for lack of response. It’s important to regularly check your email, online immigration account, or any mail correspondence to ensure that you don’t miss an important update or request from IRCC.
Improving Your Chances of Success
Meeting deadlines demonstrates responsibility and preparedness—qualities that are important in immigration applications. By following all timelines, you ensure that your application will be assessed based on its merits, without unnecessary barriers caused by incomplete submissions or missed deadlines.
Jurisprudence
As per the Federal Court of Canada decision in Haile v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 538, it is a breach of procedural fairness to set aside the principle of audi alteram partem on the basis of a short delay in the delivery of the written submissions. “Audi alteram partem” is a Latin legal maxim meaning “listen to the other side” or “hear the other party.” It is a fundamental principle of natural justice and procedural fairness, emphasizing that both sides in a dispute must have the opportunity to present their case before a decision is made.
In Rupal v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 1371, Justice Gleeson overturned a refusal where IRCC failed to notify the applicant’s representative about an update in their third-party account, specifically a passport request. As a result, the representative was unaware that IRCC had sent a passport request letter. When this issue was discovered, the applicant and their representative informed IRCC, but it was after the deadline to submit the passport. IRCC then refused the application based on the missed deadline. The Federal Court overturned this decision, stating:
In submissions, counsel for the Respondent argues that the Applicant failed to fulfill the duty to regularly verify his online portal account. It is argued that Kaur v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 1690 does not assist the Applicant, because in Kaur the documents in issue were confirmed to be before the IRCC officer prior to a decision being made. In this instance, there is some debate as to whether or not the passport was at the Officer’s disposal prior to reaching a decision.
In Kaur the decision was held to be unreasonable because it was not clear whether the decision maker had considered documents that had been submitted and acknowledged received prior to the final decision being rendered (Kaur at para 24). The very circumstance the Applicant relies upon here.
As in Kaur the issue is not whether the Officer might have been in a position to have reasonably refused the application on the basis of noncompliance with the OPR. Instead, the issue is the Officer’s failure to acknowledge and grapple with the request that a new OPR be issued, submitted and received prior to the Officer’s final decision. The failure to engage with and address that request, whether the actual passport was before the Officer or not, undermines the transparency, justification and intelligibility of the decision and renders it unreasonable (Vavilov at paras 15 and 95).