At Kahlon Law Office, we provide strategic legal representation for individuals facing admissibility hearings and detention reviews before the Immigration Division (ID) of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB). These hearings are legally binding and can determine whether you may remain in or be removed from Canada. Given the serious consequences, having skilled legal counsel is crucial in defending your rights and securing the best possible outcome.
In certain situations, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) prepares inadmissibility reports against foreign nationals or permanent residents to refer them to the Immigration Division (ID) of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) which has the capacity to issue the removal order against the individual referred for the ID hearing.
An inadmissibility report (also known as a Section 44 Report) is a formal document prepared by CBSA officers under Section 44(1) of IRPA when they believe a foreign national or permanent resident has violated Canadian immigration laws and should be deemed inadmissible. This report is reviewed by a Minister’s Delegate, who may either issue a removal order or refer the case to the Immigration Division for an admissibility hearing (IRPA s. 44(2)). The report serves as the foundation for inadmissibility proceedings and can be challenged through legal representation.
An admissibility hearing is a formal proceeding before the ID of the IRB of Canada to determine whether a foreign national or permanent resident is allowed to enter or remain in Canada. It is initiated when the CBSA believes an individual is inadmissible under Section 44(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) due to reasons such as criminality, security threats, misrepresentation, or non-compliance with immigration laws (IRPA ss. 33-42). The CBSA bears the burden of proving inadmissibility, presenting evidence before the Minister’s Counsel, while the individual (or their lawyer) has the opportunity to respond and challenge the allegations. If found inadmissible, the person may face a removal order but could have options for appeal or judicial review. The CBSA bears the burden of proving inadmissibility based on:
During the hearing, a CBSA representative (Minister’s Counsel) will present evidence against you. The burden of proof is on the Minister, and the decision is made by an independent Immigration Division member. Notably, the Federal Court has affirmed that immigration proceedings are civil, not criminal, and the standard of proof is "reasonable grounds to believe", a lower threshold than in criminal trials (Almrei, Re, 2009 FC 1263, 89 and 97).
If a removal order is issued, you may have the right to appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) or seek judicial review at the Federal Court (IRPA s. 63).
Immigration detention occurs when the CBSA detains a foreign national or permanent resident under Section 55 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) due to concerns such as flight risk, danger to the public, identity verification issues, or inadmissibility for security or criminality reasons. A detention review hearing must be held within 48 hours, and if detention continues, subsequent reviews occur at 7-day and 30-day intervals (IRPA s. 57). The Immigration Division assesses whether continued detention is justified and whether alternatives, such as release on bond, are appropriate. Courts have ruled that detention must remain reasonable and proportionate (Charkaoui v. Canada, 2007 SCC 9).
If you have been detained by CBSA under Section 55 of IRPA, you have the right to a detention review hearing within 48 hours, followed by subsequent reviews every 7 and 30 days (IRPA s. 57). The Immigration Division will assess whether continued detention is justified based on:
The Immigration Division considers alternatives to detention, such as release on bond with strict conditions (ENF 20, Detention, Section 3.2). Courts have also emphasized that detention must be reasonable and proportionate, and indefinite detention without progress violates constitutional rights (Charkaoui v. Canada, 2007 SCC 9).
We are experienced in admissibility matters and have represented several clients in such matters. If you or a loved one is facing an admissibility hearing or detention review, contact Kahlon Law Office for experienced legal representation. Time is critical in immigration matters, and early intervention can significantly impact your case.
POWERED AND MAINTAINED BY INTOPDIGITAL
© Kahlon Law Office 2025.