-
Case Title & Citation
Vaziri v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2006 FC 1159 (Federal Court). -
Decision Summary (Neutral Overview)
The applicant in Vaziri sought mandamus to compel immigration authorities to process his application. The Federal Court reviewed when mandamus is appropriate in the administrative context.
The Court affirmed that:
-
Mandamus requires a public legal duty to act, owed to the applicant.
-
There must be a request and either a refusal or unreasonable delay.
-
There must be no other adequate remedy.
-
Granting the order must have practical utility.
On the facts, the court analyzed whether immigration authorities had delayed unreasonably and whether the duty was sufficiently clear.
-
Historical & Legal Context
Vaziri is part of a line of immigration cases that sharpen the mandamus test after McArthur, making it widely cited in Federal Court practice. -
Key Legal Principles Identified in the Case
-
Clear articulation of the mandamus criteria.
-
Emphasis on reasonableness of delay and the existence of alternative remedies.
-
Implications for Haldimand, Loyalist, and Mohawk Questions
-
Vaziri supplies detailed, modern language courts use when deciding whether to issue mandamus.
-
It helps shape the argument that Canada and Ontario have clear, unmet duties regarding:
-
Recognizing Haldimand in their constitutional architecture,
-
Creating hereditary registries,
-
Clarifying jurisdiction and taxation on the tract.
-
-
Points of Interest to Mohawk of Grand River Posterity
-
The case is practical: it shows how petitioners can frame their situation in terms judges recognize—duty, request, refusal, delay, and lack of remedy.
-
It underlines that mandamus is not exotic; it is a standard remedy when governments sit on their hands.
-
Unresolved Questions / Future Research Directions
-
How will courts weigh “no other remedy” when the harm is systemic (land, jurisdiction, taxation) rather than a single application?
-
Can mandamus be used to compel structural actions, such as setting up a registry or halting unlawful taxation, rather than processing one file?
-
Sources
-
Vaziri v. Canada (MCI), 2006 FC 1159.
-
Federal Court mandamus practice notes and commentary.


Leave a Reply