⚠️ Ontario accident benefits changed July 1, 2026find out how this affects your claim →

Receiving a direction to report for removal from the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) is one of the most frightening moments a person facing deportation can experience. It can feel like the end of every option. In many cases it is not — a stay-of-removal motion can ask a court to pause the removal while an underlying case is decided. But these motions are urgent, technical, and time-sensitive, and the window to act can be very short.

This guide explains, in plain language, what a stay of removal is, how the emergency motion process generally works, the legal test the Federal Court applies, and why acting immediately matters. It is general information, not advice about any specific removal.

The time to act is when you receive a direction to report, not on the removal date. Preparing a proper motion takes time, and waiting until the last days can make it very difficult to put together a motion the court can properly consider.

Key takeaways

What a stay of removal is

A stay of removal is a temporary court order that stops CBSA from carrying out a removal for now. It does not, by itself, resolve your immigration situation or grant you status. Instead, it preserves the status quo — keeping you in Canada — so that a court or decision-maker can deal with the underlying legal question before removal makes that question moot.

Think of it as pressing pause. If you are removed from Canada while a case is pending, winning that case later may offer little practical benefit. A stay is meant to prevent that harm by holding removal off until the real issue can be decided.

Statutory stays versus judicial stays

Not every situation requires a court motion. There are two broad categories of stays.

Statutory stays

In certain defined situations, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations provide that a removal is automatically stayed — for example, while certain appeals or applications are pending. If a statutory stay applies to you, you may not need to bring a motion at all. Whether one applies is a technical question, so it should be confirmed rather than assumed.

Judicial stays

Where no statutory stay applies, you must ask the Federal Court for one by bringing a motion. This is the emergency motion most people mean when they talk about “fighting a removal.” The court will only grant it if the legal test is met.

The underlying application: a stay does not stand alone

A crucial point that surprises many people is that you generally cannot ask for a stay on its own. A stay motion must be attached to an underlying proceeding that gives the court something to protect. Common examples include:

The strength of that underlying case is central to the stay motion. If there is no genuine legal issue in the background, there is usually nothing for the court to preserve by ordering a pause.

The three-part test the court applies

The Federal Court decides stay motions using the well-established tripartite test drawn from the RJR-MacDonald and Toth line of cases. This test has not changed in 2026; the story is enforcement volume, not new law. All three parts generally must be satisfied.

Part of the test What it asks
1. Serious issue to be tried Is there a genuine, non-frivolous legal question in the underlying application?
2. Irreparable harm Would removal cause harm that cannot be undone or compensated later?
3. Balance of convenience Do the hardships weigh in favour of pausing removal rather than proceeding with it?

Serious issue

The court looks at whether the underlying case raises a real legal question — not necessarily a strong one at this stage, but one that is not frivolous or vexatious. In some contexts the threshold is applied more closely, so the underlying application should be presented carefully.

Irreparable harm

This is often the hardest part. The harm must be more than the ordinary consequences of removal. It generally must be established with clear, specific evidence rather than speculation. Examples courts consider can include serious risk to safety, but each case turns on its own facts and evidence.

Balance of convenience

Finally, the court weighs the harm to the person against the public interest in enforcing immigration laws. Because the government has an interest in carrying out valid removal orders, the person seeking the stay generally needs compelling reasons for the balance to tip in their favour.

Why timing is everything

Stay motions are emergencies. The realistic time to begin is the moment you receive a direction to report for removal — not the removal date itself. Preparing a proper motion takes time: identifying or launching the underlying application, gathering evidence of irreparable harm, and drafting the legal arguments. Waiting until the last days can make it very difficult to put together a motion the court can properly consider.

If you have received a direction to report, treat it as urgent and seek advice immediately. Do not assume that a pending application elsewhere automatically stops your removal — confirm whether a statutory stay applies or whether a motion is needed.

The 2026 enforcement backdrop

Removals have increased sharply. CBSA removed 23,160 people in 2025, up roughly 33% from the year before, with the large majority being failed or non-compliant refugee claimants. This rising enforcement volume means more people are receiving removal dates, and more are turning to stay motions as a last line of defence.

At the same time, the courts are managing heavy immigration caseloads. None of this changes the legal test, but it underscores the importance of acting early, presenting a well-supported underlying case, and confirming the current process on canada.ca or with counsel, because immigration enforcement and procedure are evolving quickly in 2026.

Frequently asked questions

Does a stay of removal let me stay in Canada permanently?

No. A stay is only a temporary pause while an underlying case is decided. It preserves your ability to pursue that case in Canada, but it does not grant status or resolve your immigration situation on its own. Whether you can remain longer depends on the outcome of the underlying application.

Can I get a stay without any other application on the go?

Generally no. A stay motion must be tied to an underlying proceeding — such as a judicial review, an H&C application, or a PRRA. The court grants a stay to protect that underlying case. Without one, there is usually nothing for the court to preserve.

What is “irreparable harm”?

It is harm that cannot be undone or adequately compensated after removal. It generally must be shown with specific evidence rather than general fears, and it must go beyond the ordinary hardship that removal causes. Courts assess this carefully, and each case depends on its own facts.

How quickly do I need to act?

As soon as possible — ideally when you receive a direction to report, not on your removal date. Preparing a stay motion and any underlying application takes time, and last-minute motions are much harder to put together properly. Delay can reduce your options.

Is the legal test different in 2026?

No. The three-part RJR-MacDonald / Toth test remains the same. What has changed is the volume of removals and the pressure on the system. Always confirm current procedures with the official sources or counsel, because immigration policy is changing quickly.

If you or a loved one has received a direction to report for removal, time is short and the process is technical. Azimi Law helps people in Toronto and across Ontario understand their options when a removal date is set. If you would like guidance about your circumstances, you are welcome to contact us as soon as possible — there is no obligation and no guarantee of any particular outcome, but understanding your options early can matter a great deal.

A removal date is not always the end.

Stay motions are urgent and time-sensitive. Get a clear, plain-language read on your options while there is still time to act.

This article is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create a lawyer–client relationship. Laws, benefit amounts, deadlines, and government policies change and depend on your specific circumstances. Please confirm current details with the official source or contact Azimi Law for advice about your situation.

Being detained by immigration authorities, or learning that a loved one has been detained, is frightening and confusing. You want to know why it happened, how long it can last, and what can be done about it. Canada’s immigration detention landscape shifted in 2025 and 2026, and understanding how detention reviews work now can help you make sense of the process.

This guide explains, in plain language, why people are detained under immigration law, how often a detention is reviewed, who has to justify continued detention, and the alternatives that keep most people out of custody. It is general information, not advice about a specific case.

Key takeaways

Why people are detained under immigration law

Immigration detention is not a criminal punishment. It is an administrative measure used in specific circumstances. Generally, a person may be detained on one or more of these grounds:

Detention is meant to be used when it is necessary, and the system is built around regular reviews so that no one is simply held indefinitely without their case being looked at again.

How detention reviews work

Immigration detention is reviewed by the Immigration Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board — an independent tribunal, separate from CBSA. The reviews happen on a set schedule.

Review When it generally happens
First review Within 48 hours of detention (or without delay after).
Second review Within 7 days of the first review.
Ongoing reviews At least once every 30 days after that.

At each review, a member of the Immigration Division decides whether continued detention is justified or whether the person should be released, sometimes with conditions. Generally, CBSA has to justify why detention should continue at each hearing. The detained person can present evidence, propose a release plan, and — where possible — put forward a bondsperson or other conditions that address the authorities’ concerns.

Each review is a fresh look, but a member also considers the reasons given at earlier reviews. If a person has already been detained for a period, the tribunal weighs how long the detention has lasted, whether it is likely to continue much longer, and whether the underlying process is moving forward. A detention that stretches on without a clear end in sight tends to draw closer scrutiny at each successive review. This is why preparation for every review matters, not just the first one — circumstances change, new evidence can emerge, and a plan that was not ready at an early review may be ready later.

Preparation for every review matters, not just the first one. Circumstances change, new evidence can emerge, and a plan that was not ready at an early review may be ready later.

Release with conditions

Release is not always all-or-nothing. The Immigration Division can order a person released on conditions designed to address the specific ground for detention — for example, reporting requirements, a bond, or supervision. A well-prepared release plan that responds directly to the concern (flight risk, danger, or identity) can make a meaningful difference at a review.

What changed in 2025 and 2026

For years, immigration detainees in Canada were sometimes held in provincial correctional facilities. That has changed. All provinces have now ended their agreements to hold immigration detainees in provincial jails, with Ontario the last to do so, effective September 15, 2025.

As those provincial arrangements wound down, CBSA moved toward federal facilities for higher-risk detention. A designated high-risk immigration station opened at Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines, Quebec, in July 2025. The overall direction is to handle immigration detention within the federal system rather than in provincial jails.

Alternatives to Detention

Detention is not the norm. Over 98% of people under CBSA supervision are managed through Alternatives to Detention (ATD) programs rather than being held in custody. These alternatives can include reporting requirements, community supervision, and other tools that let a person remain in the community while their immigration matter proceeds. The existence of these programs is part of why a strong, realistic release plan matters so much at a detention review — it shows the tribunal that the authorities’ concerns can be managed without custody.

Preparing for a detention review

Because the reviews come quickly and continue on a set schedule, preparation makes a real difference. In many cases, the focus is on showing the tribunal a concrete, workable answer to the specific ground for detention. That can involve:

A plan that speaks directly to why the person was detained is generally more persuasive than a general request for release.

How this fits with the rest of an immigration case

Detention usually runs alongside another immigration process — for example, an admissibility issue, a removal, or a claim being assessed. Reviews focus specifically on whether detention should continue, not on the merits of the underlying immigration matter. Because the two run in parallel, decisions in one can affect the other, and timelines can move quickly. Acting promptly at each stage is important. If a person disagrees with a detention decision, there may also be a route to seek review of that decision at the Federal Court, though the regular review schedule before the Immigration Division continues in the meantime.

Frequently asked questions

How soon does someone get a first detention review?

Generally within 48 hours of being detained, or without delay afterward. A second review generally follows within 7 days, and further reviews happen at least every 30 days.

Who decides whether to release a detained person?

A member of the Immigration Division — part of the independent Immigration and Refugee Board — decides at each review whether continued detention is justified or whether release, sometimes with conditions, is appropriate.

Are immigration detainees still held in provincial jails?

No. All provinces have ended agreements to hold immigration detainees in provincial jails, with Ontario last, effective September 15, 2025. CBSA has moved toward federal facilities for higher-risk detention.

Can conditions replace detention?

Often, yes. The Immigration Division can order release on conditions, and the great majority of people under CBSA supervision are managed through Alternatives to Detention rather than being held in custody. A realistic release plan that addresses the specific ground for detention can be central to a review.

Can a bondsperson help?

In many cases, a person willing to act as a bondsperson and help ensure compliance with conditions can support a release plan. Whether it helps in a particular case depends on the facts and the concern the authorities have raised.

Detention reviews move fast and the stakes are high for the person and their family. If you or someone you care about is facing an immigration detention review, Azimi Law would be glad to talk with you about how the process works and what a release plan might involve in your situation. Because the schedule is tight, reaching out early gives the most room to prepare.

Someone detained and the clock is running?

Detention reviews move quickly. Get a clear, plain-language read on the process and what a release plan might involve.

This article is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create a lawyer–client relationship. Laws, benefit amounts, deadlines, and government policies change and depend on your specific circumstances. Please confirm current details with the official source or contact Azimi Law for advice about your situation.