If you have an in-Canada humanitarian and compassionate (H&C) application pending, expect a long wait, and expect the burden of keeping the file current to fall on you. The federal government has set H&C admissions at about 1,100 people a year for 2026 to 2028, while the inventory keeps growing. The Federal Court has held that officers have no general duty to ask for updated evidence. Outdated evidence can be given less weight. An application that sits unchanged for years can be refused on evidence that was strong when it was filed.
This article is based on the “Future of Discretion in the IRPA” paper presented at the Canadian Bar Association (CBA) Immigration Law Conference in May 2026. It sets out what the delay means in practice and what you can do about it.
Key Takeaways
- The government’s 2026 levels plan sets about 1,100 admissions a year for the H&C category (which also covers some public policies and permit holders), against an H&C inventory the CBA paper put at about 72,000 people in May 2026.
- IRCC’s online processing tool shows “more than 10 years” for applications filed from April 2024. The paper’s authors believe first-stage (eligibility) decisions are currently arriving about two years after filing, but expect that to slow.
- The onus to update is on the applicant. Officers have given less weight to psychological reports and family evidence that were years old by the decision date.
- Update every 6 to 12 months, even just to confirm nothing has changed.
- A child’s right to a best interests of the child (BIOC) assessment is locked in by age at the date of application. How much weight the BIOC carries can still fade as the child grows up, so the submissions need to keep pace.
- A pending H&C does not stop removal. Build evidence of irreparable harm early, in case you need a deferral or a stay.
How long the wait really is
The CBA paper pulled together the government’s own statements:
- The H&C and Other category traditionally saw fewer than 5,000 admissions a year. Public policies pushed it above 19,000 in 2024. By September 30, 2025, only about 1,300 people had been admitted through in-Canada H&Cs that year.
- Levels for the H&C portion fall to about 1,100 a year from 2026 to 2028.
- In November 2024, the government estimated it would take five to seven years to clear the existing H&C-only inventory at the then-planned levels.
- IRCC has said it aligns processing capacity with admissions space. Adding staff will not shorten processing times without more admission spaces.
The paper also cited an approval rate of about 23 per cent for the H&C category as of mid-2025, based on published IRCC data. Its authors estimated that in-Canada inventory is now growing by about 2,000 applicants a month.
Two numbers matter more than the posted processing time. The first is when you can expect a first-stage decision, because that decision often opens the door to a work permit and matters for any stay of removal. The second is how long evidence stays persuasive. Both are measured in years.
The burden to update is yours
The Federal Court has consistently held that an applicant must supply the evidence needed to support the application, and that an officer is not required to ask for updated information (Rodriguez Zambrano v Canada (MCI), 2008 FC 481; Patel v Canada (MCI), 2011 FC 571). The exception is where the officer has credibility concerns. The Court has also found it reasonable for an officer to give less weight to an old psychological assessment (Meniuk v Canada (MCI), 2021 FC 1374).
The paper included recent refusals that show how this plays out. In one, filed with documents dating to 2020, the 2025 decision found “little documentary evidence” about the spouse’s current health, the adult children’s current studies and work, and the family’s current finances. In another, a psychological report based on a 2.5-hour interview in September 2024 was the only mental health evidence when the decision issued in March 2026. The officer noted that no update had been received.
What to do:
- Send an update every 6 to 12 months, even if only to confirm that nothing material has changed. Silence invites the officer to fill the gap.
- Update the evidence that ages fastest: medical and psychological reports, employment and income, children’s schooling and activities, and country conditions.
- If a new psychological report is too expensive, a detailed personal statement is better than nothing.
- Budget for it. Ask your representative how further submissions will be billed, and plan for more than one.
Keeping the best interests of the child alive
Whether a child’s best interests must be assessed is decided by the child’s age when the application was received. IRCC’s guidance says the BIOC must be considered where the child was under 18 when the application was received. The Federal Court has said the same (Noh v Canada (MCI), 2012 FC 529; Deng v Canada (MCI), 2019 FC 338). The Minister controls the timing, so the date of decision cannot be used to defeat the analysis.
But how much weight the BIOC carries can change. The Supreme Court held in Kanthasamy v Canada (MCI), 2015 SCC 61 that the analysis must respond to each child’s age, capacity, needs and maturity. A child who was eight when the application was filed may be a young adult by the time an officer decides it.
The paper’s suggestions:
- Keep updating the children’s evidence as they grow: school, activities, volunteering and community ties, especially after high school, when those tend to fall away.
- Emphasize what gets harder with age: learning a new language, building a social network from nothing, and adapting to a country the young person barely knows.
- Watch for recognized errors. The Federal Court has found errors where an officer turned the BIOC into a hardship test, relied on generalizations about children’s adaptability, or asked whether a young adult was still dependent when the child was under 18 at the date of application (Gayle v Canada (MCI), 2024 FC 29).
Staying in Canada while you wait
Keep status if you can. Extend your visitor, study or work status where you qualify. If no other option exists, a temporary resident permit may be worth considering.
Refused refugee claimants face extra bars. Under section 25(1.2)(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), you generally cannot file an H&C until 12 months after your last negative refugee decision. There are exceptions where removal would risk your life because adequate health or medical care is unavailable, or would adversely affect the best interests of a child directly affected (section 25(1.21)). Under section 243.2 of the Regulations, a work or study permit is cancelled when a removal order becomes enforceable. Under section 25(1.2)(b.1), a person whose claim was found ineligible and who has a pending pre-removal risk assessment cannot file an H&C until that assessment is decided. For that scenario, see our article on ineligible refugee claims under Bill C-12.
A pending H&C does not stop removal. Once enforcement begins, the usual steps are a request to CBSA to defer removal and, if that is refused, a motion for a stay in the Federal Court. The paper’s authors ask CBSA to contact IRCC to expedite the H&C, or to refer the matter for a Minister-initiated H&C under section 25.1. They point to CBSA’s own enforcement manual (ENF 10) as recognizing discretion to defer. Our article on the scope of CBSA deferral explains the limits.
The case law on how long a stay can run is still moving. Traditionally, deferral pending another application was warranted only where a decision was imminent. In Michel v Canada (PSEP), 2026 CanLII 36260 (FC), the Court granted a stay and observed that there is “a concerning circularity” in refusing deferral because a decision is not imminent when the delay is the government’s own doing. In Sidhu v Canada (PSEP), 2026 CanLII 38515 (FC), a stay was granted on evidence of a high suicide risk that no other decision-maker had considered. See also our explainer on the stay of removal test.
Build the harm evidence early. Your strongest argument at a deferral or stay stage is irreparable harm that goes beyond the ordinary consequences of removal. Evidence produced for the first time after a removal date is set can look opportunistic. Ask treating professionals to address what return would mean, not only current diagnoses.
Removal can make an H&C illusory. The paper cites 2018 access-to-information data showing approval rates falling sharply for applicants who had already been removed. Anyone removed under a deportation order also needs an Authorization to Return to Canada, adding more time even after approval.
Mandamus is harder but not impossible. IRCC must still explain unreasonable delay. An access-to-information request for your file can show whether it has actually been worked on. See our article on mandamus for delayed files.
For the fundamentals of the application itself, see our H&C application guide.
FAQ
How often should I update my H&C application?
The CBA paper recommends every 6 to 12 months, even if only to say nothing material has changed. Officers are not obliged to ask for updates, and they have given less weight to evidence that was years old.
My child was 16 when I applied and is now 19. Is the child’s best interests still assessed?
Yes. Eligibility for a BIOC assessment is fixed by the child’s age at the date of application. But the analysis responds to the child’s current age and maturity, so the evidence should be updated.
Will a pending H&C application stop my removal?
No. You may request a deferral from CBSA and, if refused, apply to the Federal Court for a stay. Results depend heavily on the evidence of irreparable harm.
I was refused as a refugee claimant. When can I apply on H&C grounds?
Generally not until 12 months after your last negative decision, unless an exception in section 25(1.21) of IRPA applies, such as an adverse effect on the best interests of a child directly affected.
Does leaving Canada end my H&C application?
It continues to be processed, but you may not be able to return, and removal has historically been associated with much lower approval rates.
Ask us about your matter
Tell us where your file stands and we will reply within two business days. Please do not send documents or identification numbers in this first message.
Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. Immigration law and IRCC/ESDC policy change frequently, and every case turns on its own facts. Reading this article does not create a lawyer–client relationship. Obtain advice tailored to your situation before you act.
Talk to a Canadian immigration lawyer. BridgePoint Law advises individuals and businesses across Canada — and on Canada–US–China cross-border matters — on humanitarian and compassionate applications and removal. Book a consultation with our team in Toronto and Kingston. We work in English, Mandarin, and Cantonese.