June 9, 2026

Judicial Review in Immigration Cases: When and How It Works

Posted by Athena Portokalidis - Bellissimo Law Group PC

When an immigration tribunal or officer makes a decision that feels wrong, judicial review may be the path forward — but it is not the same as an appeal. Here is what you need to know.

What is judicial review?

 In Canada’s immigration system, decisions about visas, refugee claims, removals, and permanent residence are made by a web of administrative bodies — the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) and its various divisions, and immigration officers within IRCC, to name a few. These decision-makers have significant power, but sometimes the decisions received do not get it right, and that is where the review mechanism offered by the Federal Court of Canada is particularly important.

Judicial review is a process by which the Federal Court of Canada examines whether an administrative decision was made lawfully and reasonably. It is not an opportunity to relitigate the facts of your case or introduce new evidence. Rather, the Court asks a focused question: did the decision-maker act within their legal authority, follow proper procedures, and reach a conclusion that is rational and justified? The remedy being sought in many cases is seeking the negative decision to be set aside, and for the matter to be re-opened and re-determined by a different decision-maker.

Key distinction: Judicial review is not an appeal. The Federal Court does not simply substitute its own judgment for that of the tribunal. It reviews the process and reasonableness of the original decision — a critically important distinction that shapes what arguments succeed.

Which immigration decisions can be judicially reviewed?

 Under section 72 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), a person may apply for leave and judicial review of almost any decision made under the Act. Common examples include:

 The leave requirement: your first hurdle

 Before your case can be heard, you must obtain leave — essentially, permission — from the Federal Court. This is a paper-based screening process where a judge reviews your written materials and determines whether there is an arguable case. There is no oral hearing at this stage.

The leave threshold is relatively low: you need to show there is at least one serious question of general importance or a reviewable error. However, many applications fail at this stage because they are framed as disagreements with findings of fact, rather than genuine legal or procedural errors. Statistics suggest that only a fraction of leave applications are granted each year — making the quality of legal arguments in your materials decisive.

 Time is critical. In many immigration cases, you have only 15 days from the date of a decision to file an application for leave and judicial review (60 days for matters arising outside of Canada, and 30 days for citizenship matters). Missing this deadline can be fatal to your application. Contact an immigration lawyer immediately upon receiving an adverse decision in order to determine the applicable deadline.

Grounds for judicial review: what arguments succeed?

 The Federal Court evaluates immigration decisions under standards established by the Supreme Court of Canada, for example in the case of Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov (2019). Most immigration decisions are reviewed on a standard of reasonableness. Some jurisdictional and procedural issues attract the stricter correctness standard.

Under these frameworks, successful judicial review applications typically fall into one or more of these categories:

  • Unreasonable decision: The decision lacks a rational basis, ignores key evidence, or contains internal contradictions that undermine its logic.
  • Breach of procedural fairness: You were not given adequate notice, a real opportunity to present your case, or reasons for the decision.
  • Legal error: The decision-maker misinterpreted or misapplied the relevant law, including the IRPA, its Regulations, or binding case law.

 The judicial review process: step by step

Understanding the typical timeline helps set realistic expectations. You can see a full overview of the Federal Court process at the following link: Federal Court | Bellissimo Law Group:

  1. File the Application for Leave and for Judicial Review, or Notice of Application.
  2. Wait for the decision maker’s detailed reasons for refusal. If the detailed reasons for refusal were received with the refusal letter or decision, skip this step.
  3. Upon receipt of the detailed reasons for refusal, begin preparing the Application Record, which will contain the affidavit(s), legal arguments, and evidence to be relied upon.
  4. The Respondent (representing the decision-maker), then has the opportunity to file their affidavit(s), if any, and Memorandum of Argument.
  5. Await the Court’s decision on leave (i.e., whether a judicial review hearing will be granted). If granted, proceed to hearing. If not, the matter concludes at this step.
  6. Once the judicial review hearing concludes, await the Judge’s decision (sometimes issued at the conclusion of the hearing, but most of the time the decision is “reserved” to be issued later in writing.

What happens if you win?

A successful judicial review does not automatically result in a positive immigration outcome. In the vast majority of cases, the Federal Court will simply set aside the original decision and send the matter back for re-determination by a different officer or panel. The new decision-maker must reach their own conclusion — and they may still deny your matter, though they should consider the errors identified by the court.

In rare cases, the court may also certify a question of general importance to the Federal Court of Appeal — a process that contributes to the development of immigration law nationally.

Can you stay in Canada during the process?

 Filing an application for leave and judicial review does not automatically stay (pause) your removal from Canada. If you are facing removal, you must separately apply for a stay of removal, either before the Federal Court or through CBSA deferral. A stay is an urgent, time-sensitive motion and requires demonstrating a serious issue, irreparable harm, and that the balance of convenience favours you.

Practical note: Judicial review proceedings can take anywhere from several months to over a year, depending on court workload and the complexity of the case. During this time, maintaining valid immigration status — or securing a deferral/stay of removal, if needed — is essential. An experienced immigration lawyer can advise on all parallel steps that should be taken.

Do you need a lawyer?

 While it is technically possible to self-represent in Federal Court, judicial review is a sophisticated legal proceeding. Success depends on correctly identifying legal errors, applying the appropriate standard of review, and crafting compelling written arguments grounded in case law. The Minister will be represented by experienced Department of Justice counsel.

Given the stakes — often, the ability to remain in Canada — retaining an immigration lawyer with Federal Court experience is strongly advisable. Consultants and non-lawyer representatives are not permitted to appear in Federal Court; only lawyers called to a Canadian bar may represent you.

 Received an adverse immigration decision?

Time limits are strict and the consequences of inaction are severe. Our immigration lawyers have extensive experience at the Federal Court and can assess whether your case has grounds for judicial review. Feel free to schedule a consultation with our office.

Athena Portokalidis

Athena graduated from the Dual J.D. program at Windsor Law in 2017, earning both a Canadian and American J.D.. While in law school, Athena volunteered at the Immigration Law Clinic at the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law, where she assisted clients in downtown Detroit, Michigan. She gained exposure to numerous U.S. immigration matters related to naturalization, permanent residency, asylum, victims of human trafficking, and juvenile migrants. Before law school, Athena received her B.A. (Hons.) with distinction from the University of Toronto, St. George, in Political Science and Philosophy.

Prior to joining Bellissimo Law Group PC, Athena worked both as a student-at-law and associate lawyer at a private immigration law firm where she had gained experience in Canadian immigration law by working on a variety of matters including judicial reviews, applications for temporary residence, permanent residence, and citizenship.

Request a Consultation