IRCC refusal: reconsideration, judicial review or re-apply?

A refusal from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) usually leaves you with four possible next steps: ask the officer to reconsider, apply to the Federal Court for judicial review, apply again, or, for a small group of decisions, appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division. Each has its own purpose, deadline and risks, and the shortest deadline (15 days in some cases) often passes while people are still deciding. Here is how each route works and when to use more than one.

The first thing to do: find the deadline

Work out how much time you have first. Judicial review in the Federal Court starts with an application for leave, and that application must be served and filed within 15 days for a matter arising in Canada, or within 60 days for a matter arising outside Canada, counted from the day you were notified of the decision or otherwise became aware of it (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 72(2)(b)).

A few practical points follow from that rule:

• The clock starts when you learn of the decision, not when you get advice. Note the date the refusal reached your account or inbox.
• Whether the matter arose in or outside Canada is not always obvious. Until a lawyer has looked at it, plan around the shorter limit.
• Nothing else pauses the clock. Sending a reconsideration request, ordering your file notes or starting a new application does not extend the time to go to Federal Court.
• Late filing is possible but not something to count on. A judge may allow extra time "for special reasons" (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 72(2)(c)), and the request must be made inside the application for leave itself (Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules, r. 6).

If the refusal is one that can be appealed to the Immigration Appeal Division, a different and separate deadline applies (see below), and you must use that appeal before you can go to the Federal Court (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 72(2)(a)).

Read the reasons before choosing a route

Since July 29, 2025, IRCC has been sending officer decision notes with refusal letters for most temporary resident applications, and since May 26, 2026 with most permanent residence refusals. Some application types are excluded, and IRCC may remove portions of a note.

When you read the notes, sort each reason the officer gave into one of three groups:

1. The officer got the facts wrong or missed something you sent. For example, the notes say no proof of funds was provided, but your bank statements were uploaded. That points toward reconsideration, judicial review, or both.
2. The officer weighed your evidence and was not persuaded, and the reasoning hangs together. A thin application is not an unlawful decision. That usually points toward a stronger new application.
3. The reasoning does not make sense on its own terms, ignores evidence that contradicts it, relies on something you were never told about, or uses boilerplate that does not fit your file. That points toward judicial review.

The notes are not always the whole file. IRCC's internal file notes can be requested under the Privacy Act, which IRCC says extends to foreign nationals regardless of where they are located. The deadline will not wait for the answer.

Option 1: Asking IRCC to reconsider

A reconsideration request is a letter asking the office that refused you to reopen the file. It is not set out in the Act or the Regulations. It exists because the Federal Court of Appeal has held that an officer is not barred from revisiting a final decision and has discretion to reconsider it, or to decline to, taking into account all the relevant circumstances (Kurukkal v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FCA 230).

So the route has real limits:

• It works for clear, provable mistakes. A document the officer overlooked, a misread date, a calculation error on your funds, a refusal that cites the wrong program requirement.
• It is not a way to add evidence you left out. If the refusal was fair on what was in front of the officer, a reconsideration request asking them to look at new material is unlikely to help. IRCC's own guidance is that applying again with the same information will likely not change the decision, and that a new application should include information you did not include before (IRCC Help Centre).
• IRCC does not have to answer, and there is no fixed processing time.
• It does not stop the Federal Court deadline. This is the most common trap.

Keep the request short: identify the decision, point to the exact error, show where the overlooked evidence was in your submission, and ask for a specific outcome.

Option 2: Judicial review in the Federal Court

Judicial review is not a full appeal. The Federal Court does not decide whether you deserve the visa, only whether the decision was lawfully made. If you succeed, the usual result is that the decision is set aside and sent back to be decided again, normally by a different officer (Federal Courts Act, s. 18.1(3)(b)).

What the Court looks at

Most IRCC decisions are reviewed on the reasonableness standard set by the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65. A reasonable decision is one that is justified, transparent and intelligible, based on internally coherent reasoning that holds up against the facts and the law that constrain the officer. In practice, refusals are often challenged because the officer:

• ignored or misstated evidence that pointed the other way;
• gave reasons that do not connect to the conclusion, or reasons that could fit any file;
• applied the wrong legal test or a requirement that does not exist in the program.

The Court also asks whether the process was procedurally fair. The content of that duty depends on the type of decision and what is at stake for the applicant (Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 SCR 817). For visa applications the duty is limited, but it can require that you be told about a concern the officer developed from outside your application, or about doubts about whether your documents are genuine, and be given a chance to respond. The grounds the Court can act on are listed in the Federal Courts Act, s. 18.1(4).

The two stages

Immigration judicial review happens in two steps (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 72(1)).

The leave stage is decided on paper by a judge, without anyone appearing in person (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 72(2)(d)). Your written argument has to persuade the judge that there is a real issue with the decision worth a full hearing. If leave is refused, that is the end of the case: there is no appeal from a leave decision (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 72(2)(e)). Because of that, the applicant's record is where most of the work happens.

The hearing stage follows only if leave is granted. The judge sets the hearing date, and the order also sets deadlines for the officer's certified record and any further material (Rules, r. 15). After the hearing, an appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal is only available if the judge certifies a serious question of general importance (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 74(d)).

A detail about the decision notes

IRCC's own instructions say that if you apply for leave and judicial review, you should state on the application that you have not received the reasons for the decision, even if you received officer decision notes. That lets the Court request the complete reasons under Rule 9 and confirm whether anything was removed from the notes (IRCC, officer decision notes).

Costs and court fees

The Federal Court's filing fee for an application for leave is $50 (Rules, r. 23). On costs, the rule in immigration matters is unusual: no costs are awarded to or against either side on the leave application, the judicial review or an appeal unless the Court finds special reasons (Rules, r. 22). So you normally will not pay the government's costs if you lose, or recover your own if you win. Ask your lawyer for a fee estimate for each stage.

Who can file

You can represent yourself in Federal Court, and the Court publishes a practice guide for self-represented applicants. Otherwise you must be represented by a lawyer (Federal Courts Rules, r. 119(1)); an immigration consultant cannot act for you there. The forms and service rules are strict, and the leave record is usually your only chance to argue before a judge decides whether to hear the case.

Option 3: Applying again

If the decision was fair but your application was thin, the most practical route is usually a better application. IRCC says you can apply again at any time unless your decision letter says otherwise, and that you should only do so if you can include information you did not include before (IRCC Help Centre). Examples include a change in the purpose of your trip, in your employment or finances, or new documents that directly answer the officer's reasons (IRCC Help Centre).

A good re-application answers each reason in the refusal, one by one, with evidence. It also tells the truth about the earlier refusal. If a form asks about previous refusals, answer fully: leaving one out can turn a simple refusal into a misrepresentation finding, which carries a five-year bar (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, ss. 40(1)(a) and 40(2)(a)).

Option 4: An appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division

Most IRCC refusals cannot be appealed. The Immigration Appeal Division hears only the categories listed in the Act, the most common being a sponsor's appeal when a family class permanent resident visa is refused (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 63(1)). Others include certain removal orders and residency obligation decisions (s. 63(2) to (4)). Visitor visas, study permits, work permits and most economic immigration refusals do not fall in these categories.

For a sponsorship appeal, the notice of appeal must be received by the Division within 30 days after the sponsor receives the officer's decision and any written reasons (Immigration Appeal Division Rules, 2022, r. 16(a)). Where an appeal is available, it must be used first: the Federal Court will not hear an application for leave until appeal rights under the Act are exhausted (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 72(2)(a)).

How to choose, and when to use more than one

• Officer plainly missed or misread something you sent: reconsideration request, with a judicial review application filed within the deadline as protection if IRCC does not act.
• Decision is unreasonable or unfair on the record as it stood: judicial review.
• Decision was reasonable but your evidence was weak: a new, stronger application. Judicial review is unlikely to help, because the Court will not consider evidence the officer never had.
• Family class sponsorship refusal or another listed decision: Immigration Appeal Division, within 30 days.

Filing both reconsideration and judicial review. Since a reconsideration request does not stop the clock, the safe approach when there is a clear error is often to send the request and also file the application for leave within the deadline. If IRCC reopens the file and approves it, the court case can be discontinued. If IRCC does not respond, the court case is already moving.

Re-applying while judicial review is pending can make sense when you need to travel by a certain date. Your lawyer should check how the two interact; an approval on the new application may leave nothing for the Court to decide.

How this can play out

A hypothetical: a parent outside Canada applies for a visitor visa to attend a child's graduation in Toronto. The refusal says the officer was not satisfied the parent would leave Canada, citing "limited financial resources." The decision notes say no bank statements were provided, but the parent uploaded six months of statements and a pension letter.

The 60-day limit applies. A reasonable plan is a short reconsideration request pointing to the uploaded statements, and in parallel an application for leave stating that reasons were not received. If the graduation is close, a new application with a cover letter answering the refusal may be the fastest path to an answer. None of these steps assures a visa, but together they keep every door open.

What to bring to your lawyer

• The refusal letter and officer decision notes, and the date and way you received them.
• A complete copy of everything you submitted, including the upload confirmation pages.
• Any earlier refusals, for this or any other country, and their letters.
• Your travel dates, and whether you are in Canada and on what status.
• Any letters from IRCC during processing, such as requests for documents or procedural fairness letters.

If you have been refused and are not sure which route fits, contact us as soon as you can, ideally within days of the decision. We will read the refusal and notes with you, confirm which deadline applies, and tell you whether a judicial review is worth bringing at all. You can learn more on our page about refusals, reconsideration and judicial review, or book a free first video meeting.

Common questions

Sources

1. Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 72
2. Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 74
3. Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, ss. 40 and 63
4. Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules, rr. 5, 6, 9–11, 13, 15, 22, 23
5. Federal Courts Act, s. 18.1
6. Federal Courts Rules, r. 119
7. Immigration Appeal Division Rules, 2022, r. 16
8. Federal Court, procedural chart: Application for Leave and for Judicial Review (Immigration)
9. Federal Court, practice guide: How to file an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review (Immigration)
10. IRCC, Explaining application refusals: officer decision notes
11. IRCC Help Centre, If my application is refused, do I have to wait to apply again?
12. IRCC Help Centre, My visitor visa was refused. Should I apply again?
13. IRCC, Access to information and privacy
14. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65
15. Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 SCR 817
16. Kurukkal v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FCA 230

General information, not legal advice. Every situation is different, and the law can change. Reading this article doesn't create a lawyer-client relationship.