A stay of removal is a suspension of the enforcement of a removal order — while a stay is in effect, CBSA cannot execute the order and remove the person from Canada. A stay does not reverse the removal order or grant any form of status; it merely delays enforcement. Stays of removal arise in several ways in Canadian immigration law: automatic stays triggered by eligible appeals to the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) or Immigration Appeal Division (IAD); judicial stays granted by the Federal Court on a motion; ministerial stays in compelling humanitarian circumstances; and the Temporary Suspension of Removals (TSR) policy applied to specific countries. The distinction between automatic and non-automatic stays is important: filing a judicial review application alone does not stay a removal order — a separate stay motion must be brought and successfully argued using the three-part test. This page explains the types of stays, when they arise, and the framework for obtaining a judicial stay.

For current information on removal and stay options after a negative refugee decision, refer to the IRCC options after asylum refusal page and the IRCC judicial review page.

• Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s 50 — stay of removal; removal is stayed during a stay imposed by a judicial order, during an appeal pending before the IAD, or in other circumstances prescribed by regulations
• IRPA, s 162(1)(g) — RAD jurisdiction over decisions made on protection claims; an eligible appeal to the RAD stays removal
• IRPA, s 63–67 — Immigration Appeal Division jurisdiction; appeals by permanent residents and protected persons stay the enforcement of the removal order during the appeal
• IRPA, s 72–75 — judicial review in the Federal Court; filing an application for leave and judicial review does not automatically stay removal; a stay motion must be brought separately
• Federal Courts Act, s 18.2 — the Federal Court has jurisdiction to grant a stay of proceedings pending judicial review
• IRCC: Options after refugee claim refusal — canada.ca/refugee-refusal-options

Automatic stay — RAD appeal

A person whose refugee protection claim is rejected by the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) generally has an automatic right to appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD). Filing the RAD appeal within the prescribed time limits triggers an automatic stay of the removal order — CBSA cannot remove the person while the RAD appeal is pending. Key points:

• The automatic stay continues until the RAD has decided the appeal
• Not all persons have a right to appeal to the RAD — persons from Designated Countries of Origin (DCO), persons whose claims were declared manifestly unfounded or clearly fraudulent, and certain other categories do not have RAD access; these persons do not receive an automatic stay by filing judicial review
• If the RAD confirms the RPD's negative decision, the automatic stay ends and the removal order can be enforced — the person then has limited time before enforcement

Automatic stay — IAD appeal

A permanent resident or protected person who is the subject of a removal order may appeal that order to the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD). The IAD has jurisdiction over:

• Removal orders made against PRs and holders of protected person status
• Removal orders arising from a sponsorship failure (where a PR was the sponsor)
• Residency obligation failures

Filing an eligible IAD appeal within the prescribed time limits triggers an automatic stay of the removal order while the appeal is pending. The IAD may allow the appeal, dismiss it (removing the stay), or issue a special relief (stay for a period subject to conditions).

No automatic stay for judicial review — the stay motion

Filing an application for leave and judicial review (ALJR) with the Federal Court against a negative immigration decision does not automatically stay a removal order. The person faces removal even while the Federal Court application is pending unless they separately obtain a stay. To obtain a judicial stay of removal, the person must bring a stay motion and establish all three parts of the tripartite test:

1. Serious issue to be determined: the underlying judicial review raises a serious issue that is not frivolous or vexatious — a low threshold but must be established
2. Irreparable harm: the person would suffer harm that could not adequately be compensated or remedied if removed before the judicial review is decided — return to danger, family separation, or loss of ability to pursue the review are examples
3. Balance of convenience: the harm to the person from removal outweighs the public interest in enforcement of the removal order

The Federal Court may grant the stay as a matter of urgency — often within 24 hours — if removal is imminent. The stay continues until the Federal Court decides the application for leave (and if leave is granted, until the judicial review hearing is decided).

Ministerial stay

The Minister of Public Safety has the discretion to grant a stay of removal in compelling circumstances under IRPA. Ministerial stays are rare and are not a routine remedy — they are reserved for exceptional cases where there are humanitarian or other compelling grounds that make immediate removal inappropriate. A person seeking a ministerial stay should generally also pursue other available remedies (IAD, judicial review).

Temporary Suspension of Removals (TSR)

IRCC may designate a country under a Temporary Suspension of Removals (TSR) when general conditions in that country — including armed conflict, environmental disaster, or severe disruption — make it temporarily unsafe to remove persons to that country. While a TSR is in effect:

• CBSA cannot remove persons to the TSR-designated country
• The TSR applies country-wide — it is not applied on a person-by-person basis
• The TSR does not grant status or reverse removal orders — it merely suspends enforcement while the country conditions exist
• The TSR can be lifted when conditions improve; once lifted, removal can resume

For current TSR designations, refer to the IRCC website.

PRRA and stay of removal

A person who is subject to removal and who has not had a PRRA assessment conducted may be eligible to apply for a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA). The PRRA process results in a stay of enforcement while the PRRA is pending, provided the person was notified of their right to apply and applied within the prescribed time. For PRRA details, see the PRRA page.

The absence of an automatic stay for judicial review applicants is a critical procedural point — persons who are approaching their removal date after receiving a negative decision must be aware that filing a judicial review does not stop removal; an urgent stay motion is required. Immigration counsel is strongly advisable in these circumstances, as the stay motion must be filed, served, and argued on very tight timelines. The Federal Court's stay jurisprudence generally requires a person to show a meaningful prospect of success in the underlying review and concrete irreparable harm from removal — generic fears or pending applications are not sufficient. PRRA stays are an important procedural protection that ensures persons are given a final opportunity to raise new risks before removal; the PRRA intake period is triggered by CBSA issuing a notification of removal. For current options after a negative refugee decision, judicial review procedures, and stay motion practice, refer to the IRCC options after asylum refusal page.