An ADR conference at the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) is a meeting of about one hour where the appellant and the Minister's counsel try to settle an appeal without a hearing. Nobody in the room decides the appeal. A neutral Early Resolution Officer runs the meeting, and at the end the Minister's counsel either recommends that the appeal be allowed or says it cannot be settled. A formal IAD hearing, by comparison, usually takes three hours or more.
ADR stands for alternative dispute resolution. The IAD offers it in the appeals it selects, under rules 64 to 71 of the Immigration Appeal Division Rules, 2022. What follows is the order of events as the Immigration and Refugee Board describes it, and what each rule adds.
Who sits at the table?
The group is small, and witnesses are usually not part of it.
- Early Resolution Officer (ERO)
- An IAD representative who is neutral. Opens the meeting, asks about the appeal, meets each side privately and writes up any agreement.
- Minister's counsel
- Represents Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada or Public Safety, depending on the appeal. Questions the appellant and gives the recommendation.
- The appellant and a representative
- The sponsor or permanent resident who filed the appeal, with counsel if one has been retained. A licensed paralegal can act as that representative before the IAD.
- Interpreter
- Present if one was requested. The IAD provides the interpreter at no cost.
- The sponsored person, when asked
- In a sponsorship appeal, the person abroad may be asked to join to answer questions.
The conference can be attended on Microsoft Teams, in person or by phone. The method is set by the IAD; a change has to be asked for in writing.
How does an appeal end up in ADR?
The IAD picks the appeals itself, and only those it thinks could end without a hearing. Its guidance gives two situations where that is likely:
- the Minister's counsel might agree that the appeal could be allowed, for example after seeing documents the visa officer never had;
- the appellant, once the reasons the appeal would probably fail are explained, might decide to withdraw it.
An appeal that is selected receives a Notice to Appear with the date, the time and the place. Rule 69 also lets a party ask for a conference. The request is made in writing, states why the party believes ADR can resolve the appeal, and goes to the other party as well. The reverse is possible too: the IRB's page describes a written request to opt out, copied to the Minister's counsel, for an appeal that the appellant believes cannot be resolved without a hearing.
Before the conference, an Early Resolution Officer may call or write to ask for more information. That contact is part of the same informal resolution process, which rule 64 lets the IAD require. Rule 65 expects both sides to come prepared to settle, with counsel holding the authority to do so.
The ten days before the conference
Three things have a deadline that falls before the meeting. Each one is counted back from the conference date and means received by the IAD, not sent.
| What | Received no later than | Goes to |
|---|---|---|
| New documents the appellant intends to rely on | 10 days before the conference | The IAD and the Minister's counsel |
| A request for an interpreter, if none was asked for earlier | 10 days before the conference | The IAD, in writing |
| A request to attend another way (in person, by Teams or by phone) | 10 days before the conference | The IAD, in writing |
The IRB also suggests reading two papers again before the day: the refusal letter or removal order, and the officer's notes from the Global Case Management System, known as GCMS notes. Those notes are where the officer's concerns are written down, and they are usually what the Minister's counsel asks about. The ERO can help explain the refusal and point to the kind of documents that would answer it.
How the hour runs
The IRB sets out the conference as a fixed sequence. The second column shows who has the floor at each turn.
- EROOpens the meeting and explains how it will go.
- EROAsks about the appeal: the refusal or removal order and what is in dispute.
- AppellantExplains why the appeal ought to be settled in the appellant's favour, including any mistake in the original decision and any special circumstances.
- Minister's counselAsks the appellant questions, often on the points raised in the GCMS notes.
- AppellantMakes final remarks and clarifies anything left unclear.
- Appellant's counselMay ask clarifying questions of the appellant.
- ERO and Minister's counselMeet privately, without the appellant.
- ERO and appellantA private meeting if the appellant asks for one. The ERO may give a neutral view of how the appeal could fare at a hearing.
- Minister's counselGives a recommendation.
Nothing in that list is a ruling. The ERO's view at turn 8 is an opinion offered to help both sides, and the recommendation at turn 9 is the Minister's position, which the IAD still has to approve if it leads to an agreement.
What happens after the recommendation?
The meeting splits into one of two paths depending on what the Minister's counsel says.
A recommendation to allow the appeal
- The ERO drafts an ADR agreement stating briefly why everyone agrees the appeal is allowed.
- The appellant and the Minister's counsel review it, then sign it or confirm it verbally.
- An IAD member approves it in writing (rule 71).
- The appellant receives a final written decision allowing the appeal, and no hearing is held.
A recommendation against settling
- The Minister's counsel gives brief reasons and leaves the meeting.
- The appellant and counsel decide whether to withdraw the appeal or go on to a hearing.
- The ERO gives a neutral assessment of the appeal's prospects at a hearing.
- If the appeal continues, the ERO explains the hearing process and the expected wait.
An appeal that goes on to a full hearing is heard fresh by an IAD member, who can look at the legal question and, where the Act allows it, humanitarian and compassionate factors. Our article on preparing for a full hearing at the Immigration Appeal Division covers that stage.
What stays confidential, and what does not
The rules draw a line between what people say in the meeting and the papers they hand over.
Rule 70 covers who runs the meeting. The IAD assigns a member or a Board employee as facilitator. A member who facilitates an ADR conference cannot later hear the same appeal unless both parties agree, so the person who heard the private discussion is not the one deciding the case.
Which appeals go through this step?
In the IRB's guide to residency obligation appeals, informal resolution is step 3, after the appeal is filed and before the IAD schedules a hearing. A sponsor appealing a refused family class application can meet the same conference, and the person being sponsored may be asked to join it. Karb Law represents appellants at both stages, in sponsorship appeals and in residency obligation appeals. Who has a right of appeal at all is set by sections 63 and 64 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, explained in our article on who can appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division.
Rule 72 describes a different meeting that is easy to confuse with ADR: a conference the IAD can require to narrow the issues, agree facts and gather information for scheduling. That conference organizes the hearing; it does not aim to settle the appeal.
Angelina Shuster is a paralegal licensed by the Law Society of Ontario, and the IAD is one of the tribunals where a paralegal may represent a party. To have a refusal or appeal record reviewed, the free assessment form is the place to start.
This article is general information about IAD procedure. It is not legal advice and does not create a paralegal-client relationship.
