Court Confirms H&C Evidence is Irrelevant for PRRA Risk Assessments
- Citation
- 2026 FC 723
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-9588-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Okogun v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 723
The applicant, a failed refugee claimant from Nigeria, sought a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA), arguing risk from a gang and the government. A senior immigration officer refused the PRRA, finding he had only re-stated old risks and provided evidence irrelevant to a PRRA, such as his establishment in Canada.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court dismissed the judicial review application, finding the officer's decision was reasonable. The Court affirmed the clear legal distinction between a PRRA, which assesses forward-facing risk in one's home country, and an H&C application, which considers factors like establishment in Canada.
Key Quote from the Court
Here, as in Dai (above, at para 26), Mr. Okogun has mixed up “the concepts of (i) hardship, relevant on an H&C application, (ii) risk, assessed on a PRRA, and (iii) irreparable harm, considered on stays of removal, as well as the jurisprudence relating to these three different assessments.” (at para 18)
Expert Takeaways
-
PRRA and H&C Applications are Distinct Evidence for a Humanitarian & Compassionate (H&C) application, such as establishment in Canada or the best interests of a child, is irrelevant to a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA). A PRRA focuses exclusively on new, forward-facing risks in your country of origin.
-
Submit Only Relevant Evidence For a PRRA, all submitted evidence must directly relate to a new risk of persecution, torture, or cruel and unusual treatment. Community support letters or evidence of family life in Canada will be given little to no weight by the decision-maker.
-
PRRA is Not a Re-Hearing of a Refugee Claim A PRRA is not an opportunity to re-argue a failed refugee claim. The burden is on the applicant to provide new evidence of new risks that have emerged since the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) made its final decision.
-
Undeclared AI Use Carries Risks The Court noted the applicant's use of AI which produced 'hallucinated caselaw.' This undermines credibility and can lead to cost awards. Always verify legal citations and be transparent about the use of AI tools in legal submissions.
There is a deadline on this
That is the window to file an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review at the Federal Court, counted from the day you were notified of the decision. An extension can be requested, but it is granted at the Court's discretion - it is not automatic.
Check my deadlineDoes this ruling apply to your situation?
Tick whatever is true for you. Nothing is sent anywhere - this stays in your browser.
That combination is worth a proper look. It does not mean you have a case - only a lawyer reading your actual documents can say that - but it does mean the question is worth asking before your filing window closes.
Disclaimer
The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law is complex and subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please schedule a consultation with a qualified legal professional.
Study permit or TRV refused?
A refusal is not always the end — Federal Court judicial review may overturn it.
No obligation - we review your documents and tell you if a Federal Court application is realistic.
Questions people ask after reading a case like this
Does this mean my own case will succeed?
No. Every application is decided on its own record. A reported decision shows how the Federal Court has reasoned about a particular kind of error - it does not predict the result of a different file. What it can tell you is whether the problem in your refusal is the kind of problem the Court has been willing to intervene on.
How long do I have to challenge a refusal?
Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act you generally have 15 days to file an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review if the decision was made inside Canada, and 60 days if it was made outside Canada, counted from when you were notified. The Court can extend that period, but an extension is discretionary - it is not automatic.
What actually happens at the Federal Court?
Judicial review has two stages. You file the application and a written record, and a judge decides on paper whether to grant leave - permission for the case to proceed. If leave is granted, there is a hearing. The Court does not re-decide your immigration application; it decides whether the officer's decision was reasonable and procedurally fair. If you succeed, the file is normally sent back to be decided again by a different officer.
Do I have to be in Canada to bring an application?
No. Applicants outside Canada regularly bring judicial review applications, which is why the longer 60-day deadline exists for decisions made abroad. Applicants are not normally required to attend in person.
What happens in the free 15-minute review?
You explain what was refused or delayed and when you were notified. We tell you whether your filing window is still open, which issues in the decision look arguable, and what the realistic options are - including reapplying instead of litigating, where that is the better route. There is no obligation to retain us afterwards.
More Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) rulings
Federal Court: Winning Judicial Review Doesn't Guarantee Legal Costs
Court: Officers Can't Demand 'Exact' Details While Ignoring Real Refugee Risk
Federal Court: Refusal Based on "Insufficient Evidence" is a Credibility Finding
Federal Court Overturns PRRA Refusal for Relying on Outdated Country Information
Written by
Ali Dadkhah
Ali Dadkhah is a litigator whose practice is dedicated to challenging government decisions at the Federal Court of Canada. He specializes in judicial review, providing a crucial avenue for recourse for individuals and businesses who have faced unfair or unreasonable administrative outcomes. Bilingual legal support in English and Persian (Farsi)