Removal date after a PRRA or deferral refusal: how a Federal Court stay works and the deadlines

By Pardeep S. Grewal, lawyer at Lawgical Law Corporation · Reviewed November 6, 2026

Published November 7, 2026

Pardeep S. Grewal is a lawyer at Lawgical Law Corporation, called to the BC bar in 2024, and a member of the Law Society of British Columbia.

If your pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA) was refused, or CBSA refused your request to defer removal, and you have a removal date, judicial review of that refusal does not stop removal on its own; a motion to stay your removal in the Federal Court is what keeps you in Canada while the review goes ahead. The judicial review must be filed within 15 days of being notified of the refusal, the stay motion at least 3 business days before a hearing held before your removal date, and only a lawyer can represent you in the Federal Court. This guide covers stays after both refusals, and I also bring stay motions after a refused H&C application. For the PRRA itself, see how a PRRA works.

Lawgical Law Corporation, an immigration law firm in Surrey, Abbotsford and Vancouver, BC, brings stay motions in the Federal Court after PRRA and deferral refusals for people facing removal across Canada; this guide is by Pardeep S. Grewal.

Book a consultation about your stay of removal TapClick to open a short form. Our team will contact you to arrange a time.Short form, 4 quick fields Open form

What does a PRRA or deferral refusal say?

In these refusals, the officer accepts the background you rely on, such as the country conditions in a PRRA or your family and medical situation in a deferral request, but finds it does not show a personal, forward-looking risk to you, or a short-term harm serious enough to delay removal. A PRRA refusal is a one-page result letter, with the reasons in separate notes to file that often open with a page of tick boxes. A deferral refusal starts with boilerplate on CBSA’s duty to remove and a timeline from your file, then answers each point you made, so a point with no document behind it is often dismissed in a line.

You will often see phrases like these in a PRRA officer’s notes to file:

• “I do not find that the applicant’s PRRA materials indicate that the applicant would face a personalized, forward-looking risk of harm”
• “the applicant must demonstrate a personalized risk, rather than relying solely on generalized reports”
• support letters may be described this way: “Overall, I assign the letter little weight in this assessment”
• “I am not satisfied that the applicant has rebutted the presumption of adequate state protection”

Other wording that appears in CBSA’s deferral notes:

• “The Canada Border Services Agency has an obligation under section 48(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to carry out removal orders as soon as possible”
• “my discretion is limited to compelling evidence of serious detriment resulting from the enforcement of the removal order as scheduled”
• “There is no statutory bar to removal and a person is not entitled to a deferral simply because they are litigating a negative PRRA or H&C decision”
• after a PRRA refusal, “PRRA has been refused. Therefore the underlying basis of your deferral request is no longer present”
• “this request does not appear to be short-term”

In other words, the officer has decided that you can be removed on the scheduled date, and neither a new request nor a judicial review on its own will stop it; only a stay order from the Federal Court will.

Why this refusal needs a lawyer

One lawyer, one file, every step:

• reviewing the refusal and the officer’s notes;
• filing the judicial review within 15 days and the stay motion within the court’s timelines, before your removal date;
• arguing the motion in the Federal Court, often on short notice;
• a request to CBSA to defer, if there is a short, dated reason and time for it.

A refusal like this turns on administrative law and the test for a stay: reading the officer’s notes against the evidence you sent, and showing the Court a serious issue, harm that cannot be undone and a balance in your favour. A stay motion must be attached to a court case, so the judicial review of the PRRA or deferral refusal is filed first or at the same time.

Immigration lawyers are members of a provincial law society (in our case, the Law Society of British Columbia), and only lawyers can represent you in the Federal Court. The stay motion, the sworn evidence behind it and the hearing are court steps, and they often happen within days of the refusal.

Some articles about these refusals mention judicial review as an option. A consultant cannot file it, argue a stay motion or appear for you at the hearing. Once the refusal is made, only a stay order from the Court stops the removal.

What are my options after a PRRA or deferral refusal?

1. Have a lawyer review the refusal and the officer’s notes. The 15 days and the court’s timelines run from now, and the notes show which of your points the officer rejected and why.
2. Judicial review in the Federal Court. You must apply for leave within 15 days of being notified of the refusal under section 72 of the Act. For a PRRA, the Court reviews the risk decision (see how judicial review of a PRRA refusal works); for a deferral, the removal officer’s refusal. Judicial review of either does not stop removal.
3. A motion to stay removal. It is filed with the judicial review, at least 3 business days before a hearing held before your removal date. If the Court grants it, you stay in Canada until the judicial review is decided.
4. A second PRRA or an H&C application. Neither stops removal on its own, and a second PRRA is usually barred for 12 months after a refusal.

Asking the officer to reconsider does not stop removal, and the court deadlines do not wait for the other options.

Could the Federal Court stay your removal?

The strongest argument, in my view, is a specific error in the refusal you are challenging: for a PRRA, an officer who accepted that people like you face risk but gave your own evidence “little weight” without saying why; for a deferral, an officer who did not deal with a short, dated and documented reason, such as a child’s short-term needs or a treating doctor’s letters.

To stop removal, the Court must find three things: a serious issue in the judicial review, irreparable harm if you are removed before it is decided, and a balance of convenience in your favour. After a PRRA refusal, the serious issue only has to be not frivolous or vexatious. After a deferral refusal, the bar is higher: a stay would give you what the deferral would have, so the judge looks closely at the merits and you need a case likely to succeed, “quite a strong case” (Baron v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2009 FCA 81, paras 66-67).

In the refusals I have reviewed, the PRRA arguments that held up pointed to a reasoning error in the notes: the wrong test for persecution, state protection presumed where the state is the one feared, or contrary country evidence passed over. On a deferral, they showed that the officer missed the specific short-term ground, such as a child’s short-term best interests (Lewis v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2017 FCA 130) or a treating psychiatrist’s letters. In Kokeny v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2024 FC 675, the Court stayed removal pending review of a PRRA because the finding that the harm was discrimination, not persecution, was unexplained, and those errors also supported irreparable harm.

Irreparable harm must be clear, personal and not speculative. Family hardship and job loss are usual consequences of removal (Baron, para 69), and repeating the risk the PRRA officer already rejected is not enough. The evidence that counts is sworn and specific: an affidavit on your own risk, country evidence about your profile, or a treating doctor’s report that answers the officer’s questions. In Abouchekeir v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2025 FC 387, the Court found a serious issue but refused the stay, because there was no evidence that treatment was unavailable at home.

Whether this argument fits your case depends on which refusal you challenge, the evidence behind it and how close the removal date is. The balance of convenience weighs your case against CBSA’s duty to remove “as soon as possible”, and your own conduct counts: in Kazeem v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2025 FC 57, undisclosed criminal and immigration history was enough on its own to refuse the stay. Any procedural fairness issue, such as whether the PRRA officer should have held a hearing, is a separate question that depends on your file.

What do the removal rules require?

Example. Say CBSA refuses your deferral request on Monday, November 9, 2026, and your removal is set for Friday, November 20. The 15 days for judicial review would run to November 24, but removal comes first, so the leave application and the stay motion have to be filed well before the removal date. Four business days before Friday, November 20 is Monday, November 16: that is the last ordinary filing day. After it, only an urgent hearing is possible, and the Court can refuse it.

Section 48(2) of the Act says an enforceable removal order must be enforced as soon as possible, which is why a removal officer’s discretion to defer is limited (Baron, paras 48-51). The automatic stay that comes with a PRRA ends when the PRRA is rejected (section 232 of the Regulations), and a second PRRA does not stop removal (section 165); an H&C application stays removal only if the Minister decides it is justified (section 233).

The deadlines are the court’s. The application for leave and judicial review is due within 15 days of notice of the refusal (section 72). The stay motion is filed at least 3 business days before the hearing under rule 362 of the Federal Courts Rules, and the hearing must take place before your removal date, so the last ordinary day to file is 4 business days before removal. In the 3 business days before removal, the motion can only go ahead as an urgent hearing, which the Court can refuse to hear.

How do PRRA and removal officers decide?

A PRRA officer and a CBSA removal officer decide on the written submissions and the documents sent with them:

• a PRRA officer asks whether the risk is personal and forward-looking, and considers only evidence that is new since the refugee decision;
• support letters are weighed one at a time, and earlier findings, such as an internal flight alternative, carry forward unless new evidence deals with them;
• a removal officer asks whether the reason to delay is short-term and tied to a dated event;
• medical evidence is weighed for the diagnosis, prognosis, timeframe of care and whether treatment is available at home, and a child’s short-term interests are considered, not a full best-interests analysis.

Open-ended deferral requests, such as waiting for an H&C decision or a long assessment waitlist, are usually refused because they are not short-term. A general doctor’s letter, or a support letter that repeats your own account, rarely answers the questions the officer asks.

Timing counts too. A deferral request sent the day before removal leaves no time for CBSA to decide and for a stay motion to be filed before the urgent window. I aim to send it early enough that CBSA has at least 3 business days to decide, with 2 more business days to prepare the stay materials if it refuses.

How is this different from the Suryandari caregiver case?

In Suryandari v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2025 FC 1611, CBSA refused to defer the removal of a family caregiver, and the Federal Court dismissed the stay motion. The Court applied the higher bar for a deferral refusal. It found that the harm to other family members was third-party harm, not the applicant’s own, and that the applicant’s unauthorized work weakened the case, so the balance of convenience favoured the Minister.

A stay built on your own documented harm is in a different position:

• It rests on harm to you. Your own risk on return, a medical procedure or your unfitness to fly is personal harm, not harm to someone else.
• It is backed by sworn evidence. An affidavit and specific documents show the harm, rather than letters that repeat what an officer already rejected.
• Your history is fully disclosed. Nothing in your own conduct tips the balance of convenience toward the Minister.

Suryandari does show that the Court expects the harm to be your own and proven with evidence. In my experience, the refusal you challenge, the PRRA or the deferral, sets how high the bar is.

Refused after a second request, with children, or on short notice?

I review these refusals too, including refusals of a second deferral request, restricted PRRAs after an inadmissibility finding, and deferral refusals involving a child’s schooling or care. A second request needs a new dated reason, not the same one again. If removal is set on very short notice, the Court can hear a stay motion on less than the usual notice under rule 362, but in the files I have seen, late judicial reviews and last-minute motions counted against the applicant.

Mistakes I have seen before a removal date

• Waiting for CBSA’s answer before preparing the court papers. A deferral refusal can come close to the removal date, and the stay motion needs time to prepare.
• Treating the H&C application as a stay. A pending H&C application does not stop removal unless the Minister decides the grounds justify it.
• Asking for a deferral with no evidence. The removals officer decides on what is in front of them, so a request without documents about the child, the illness or the pending application is easy to refuse.
• Filing only the stay motion. A stay is tied to an underlying application for leave and judicial review, which has its own 15-day deadline.

Frequently asked questions

Does filing a judicial review stop my removal?

Not on its own. After a PRRA or deferral refusal, removal can go ahead unless a judge orders a stay. The automatic stay applies only to leave applications against some Refugee Appeal Division decisions.

Does a stay of removal give me status in Canada?

No. A stay only pauses the removal while the court case is decided; the removal order stays in force. Your status depends on the underlying application.

How long do I have to go to the Federal Court after a deferral refusal?

15 days from notice of the refusal. The stay motion is usually filed at the same time, because the removal date is often sooner.

Will an H&C application stop my removal?

Only if the Minister decides that humanitarian and compassionate grounds justify a stay. Filing the application by itself does not stop removal.

What does it cost to file in the Federal Court?

The filing fee for the application for leave and judicial review is $50 (as of November 9, 2026). Lawyer’s fees are separate.

Related guides: PGWP refused, then a CBSA removal order, a no credible basis refusal, sponsoring an out-of-status spouse and removals to the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain resuming.

What should I do right now?

Note the date you were notified of the refusal and your removal date, and gather the PRRA decision and notes or the deferral refusal and notes, the direction to report, every past deferral request and CBSA’s replies, the RPD or RAD decisions if you had them, and your medical, school or other dated documents. Report as directed; with a removal date set, fifteen days passes fast.

Book a consultation with our immigration lawyers in Abbotsford, Surrey or Vancouver to review the refusal, your removal date and whether a stay motion can be filed in time.

Ready to book? Open the booking form ↑

Sources (official)

• Justice Laws Website: IRPA s.72
• Justice Laws Website: Section 48(2) of the Act
• Justice Laws Website: section 232 of the Regulations
• Justice Laws Website: section 165
• Justice Laws Website: section 233
• Justice Laws Website: rule 362 of the Federal Courts Rules
• IRPR s.231
• Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules
• Federal Court: application for leave and judicial review (immigration) checklist

This article is general information, not legal advice. Every case depends on its own facts.