The Federal Court of Canada is facing an existential workload crisis, with Chief Justice Alan Diner warning that the institution is buckling under a sixfold increase in immigration cases since 2020—with no additional judges to share the burden.
Speaking exclusively from his Ottawa chambers, Diner revealed the court is now hurtling towards 33,000 immigration filings this year alone, a staggering leap from the 5,000 to 6,000 cases annually when he first joined the bench in 2014. The judge, who assumed the top position on 6 July, said his colleagues are working around the clock just to keep pace.
“The judges have the pedal to the metal and are trying to do their utmost,” Diner said. “They’re working weekends, working vacations, court staff, the same thing—available evenings, available weekends to try and deal with this volume.”
A Crisis Measured in Numbers
The statistics paint a stark picture. Between January and June this year, more than 14,000 immigration cases landed on the court’s desk, with 28,000 others sitting pending. Almost 1,000 cases have been granted hearings for judicial review.
Immigration-related matters now constitute approximately 86 per cent of all cases brought before the Federal Court in the first half of the year—a proportion that has remained consistently dominant across recent years.
Despite the astronomical rise in demand, the court continues to operate with its complement of 44 judges, including the chief justice himself. Diner has been blunt about the arithmetic: it is mathematically impossible for the same number of jurists to process six times the workload without consequences.
“So, difficult for the same number of judges to do six times the amount of work,” he acknowledged. “But obviously it’s incumbent on us to improve to the extent that we can, and be innovative and modernize and use technology to try and somehow stem this flow.”
Legislative Changes Compound the Strain
The court is simultaneously grappling with the aftershocks of Bill C-12, Canada’s border security legislation that received Royal Assent in March. The law imposes strict new timelines on asylum claims, mandating that the Immigration and Refugee Board hear only those refugee claims lodged within a person’s first year in Canada.
The legislation applies retroactively to arrivals after 24 June 2020 and affects all claims filed on or after 3 June 2025. Those who miss the one-year window face a pre-removal risk assessment—their negative determinations can only be challenged through the Federal Court.
The result? More than 2,000 constitutional challenges to C-12 have flooded the court since its passage. These cases are currently working through intensive case management, where presiding judges will determine core constitutional questions based on a representative sample of claims.
But that’s not all. The court is also experiencing what Diner describes as a “huge increase” in requests for deportation stays. Annual applications, historically hovering between 300 and 400, have ballooned to over 1,100 since C-12 became law.
Document processing times have suffered accordingly. The Federal Court registry issued guidance last month acknowledging that while the target remains 48-hour turnaround, delays could extend to eight weeks—particularly for immigration matters.
Burnout and Wellbeing Take Centre Stage
Behind the statistics lies a human cost. Diner did not shy away from the personal toll exacted on judges and court employees alike.
“Working weekends, working holidays, working through your vacations is not really an acceptable answer to how we’re going to have long term well-being,” he said. “When you’re under the kinds of pressure that I’ve talked about, you can imagine that people end up feeling sensitive, burned out, and so forth.”
The chief justice expressed quiet pride in how his team has responded to the surge, but emphasised that resilience has its limits.
“It would be a lie for me to say this is without challenges. Judges are being pressured, court staff are being pressured, and I’m very proud of the way they’re handling this unprecedented increase, but we’re doing what we can.”
He stressed that protecting the wellbeing of his complement is now among his foremost priorities as chief justice.
Technology and the Question of AI
With human resources stretched to breaking point, the court is pinning hopes on technological innovation. Diner outlined efforts to accelerate the digitisation work that gained momentum during the COVID-19 pandemic, alongside explorations of automation and artificial intelligence tools.
Such technology could eventually extend beyond mere administration. The prospect of AI assisting—not replacing—judicial processes is under active consideration.
“That’s obviously something we’re going to have to consider. Not to make decisions, but to see where we can assist in the process, given this unprecedented surge,” Diner explained. “We do know that AI is increasingly being used and obviously we also have to consider if the judiciary can use AI to help cope with this unprecedented volume.”
Meanwhile, the broader federal government has taken note. A spokesperson for Justice Minister Sean Fraser said the minister is “mindful” of the caseload surge and committed to supporting timely access to justice. The department, the spokesperson added, continues to assess resource requests, with evidence of growing backlogs serving as a critical factor in those evaluations.
Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel Garner, however, was unsympathetic to government concerns. She argued the caseload explosion is the direct consequence of poor policy management over the past decade—a period that includes Fraser’s tenure as immigration minister.
“I think that the government needs to take a bit of a pause and look at why there is such a volume of caseload and then try to address some of the determinants of those causes,” Rempel Garner said. “Their poor management of the file, putting it mildly over the last decade, has had an impact on the court system. Of course it has.”
She also pointed to warnings issued during C-12’s committee stage, when parliamentarians were told to expect immediate constitutional challenges upon the bill becoming law.
Beyond Immigration: A Widening Jurisdiction
While immigration dominates the court’s docket, Diner cautioned that other areas of jurisdiction are also experiencing heightened demand—national security matters, class actions, and judicial reviews all require attention. The court cannot afford to sacrifice quality in one area while managing crises in another.
Why it Matters
The Federal Court’s capacity crisis goes far beyond administrative inconvenience—it strikes at the heart of Canada’s commitment to rule-of-law principles and the fundamental right to a fair hearing. When judges are processing six times their historical caseload with no additional resources, the quality of deliberation inevitably suffers, and litigants—whether asylum seekers fleeing persecution or permanent residents facing deportation—may find themselves denied the thorough consideration their cases deserve. Beyond the immediate legal consequences, this backlog creates a vicious cycle: delayed justice erodes public confidence in institutions, while staff burnout threatens institutional memory and expertise that cannot simply be replaced. As immigration remains central to Canada’s economic and social fabric, the government’s response to this judicial crisis will signal whether it genuinely prioritises both border security and the rights of those who seek shelter within Canadian borders.