Immigration and Refugees Law
Reading Time
4 MINUTE READ
In the context of Canadian immigration law, Administrative Deferral of Removal (ADR) serves as a critical temporary measure to halt the removal of individuals to specific countries or places facing generalized risk. This mechanism is governed by Section 230 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR).
The Minister may impose a stay on removal orders if a country or place poses a generalized risk to the entire civilian population due to:
There is no single, static legislative list; rather, the scope of ADR changes based on Ministerial and CBSA decisions. Recent Federal Court rulings have identified several locations currently or recently under ADR, including:
| Country / Place | Legal Reference |
|---|---|
| Libya | Algazal v Canada, 2024 FC 753 |
| Venezuela | Camacho Valera v Canada, 2021 FC 1087 |
| Ukraine | Kiver v Canada, 2025 FC 819 |
| Mogadishu (Somalia) | Jama v Canada, 2019 FC 1459 |
Other countries mentioned in various judicial discussions include Yemen, Syria, and Burundi, though the status of these locations is subject to ongoing administrative review.
According to IRPR Section 230(3), the stay on removal does not apply to individuals who are inadmissible on the following grounds:
Inadmissibility under section 34(1).
Inadmissibility under section 35(1).
Inadmissibility under section 35.1(1).
Serious criminality (36(1)), general criminality (36(2)), or transborder criminality (36(2.1)).
Inadmissibility under section 37(1).
Persons referred to in Section F of Article 1.
Individuals who consent in writing to their removal.
For specialized legal consultations regarding removal cases and more information on immigration regulations, you can visit the Pax Law website home page.
Canada H&C Application Fees: A Comprehensive Guide to the Legal and Financial Framework Navigating Humanitarian and Compassionate (H&C) applications in Canada requires a clear understanding of both the procedural requirements and the underlying statutory financial
This article details the legal criteria and statutory conditions evaluated by the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) when deciding to stay a removal order on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. It explains how the tribunal balances diverse factors, such as the best interests of affected children, the depth of an individual’s establishment in Canada, and their potential for rehabilitation.
The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Mason (2023) provides a strong framework to reject overbroad interpretations of security inadmissibility by requiring a strict, direct nexus to Canada’s national security.
0 Comments