Getting a Section 44 report or a Notice to Appear from CBSA can feel like your world is falling apart. For most people, this is how it starts. And by the time the word “admissibility hearing” enters your vocabulary, you’re usually already scared, confused, and Googling things at midnight.
This is not a parking ticket. It’s a proceeding that can end with you being asked to leave the country you’ve built a life in.
The Law Office of Karan Mahal represents people at admissibility hearings in front of the Immigration Division of the IRB. We’re based out of Brampton, and over the years we’ve sat across the table from clients who had no idea a Section 44 report even existed until it landed on them. If that’s where you are right now, take a breath. Then call us. There’s usually more room to fight than people assume.
Think of it as a courtroom, except it isn’t a criminal court, and the person deciding your fate is called a Member of the Immigration Division, not a judge. Semantics matter less than the outcome, though. What this hearing decides is simple on paper and massive in real life. It decides whether you stay in Canada or not.
The process almost always begins with an immigration officer, either from CBSA or IRCC, forming the opinion that you might be inadmissible. That opinion gets written down formally. This document is the Section 44 report. It’s the trigger point for everything that follows.
From there, a senior officer reviews the report. If they agree with it, your file gets referred over to the Immigration Division (ID), and you’ll be sent a Notice to Appear. This letter has your hearing date and the location, and honestly, it reads more like a summons than a letter.
A quick thing worth knowing: not every Section 44 report ends up at a hearing. Some situations get handled at the officer level. Some of them just come with a warning. But if a Notice to Appear has already reached your hands, the hearing is happening. Preparation needs to start now, and you need to get in touch with an immigration division hearing lawyer.
The law lists out specific reasons someone can be found inadmissible. They don’t all carry equal weight, and they definitely don’t all get defended the same way.
This is, by far, the ground we deal with most often. It could stem from something that happened years ago in another country, sometimes a conviction the person barely remembers reporting anywhere.
The key question the ID looks at is whether that offense would also count as a crime under Canadian law. How serious it would be considered here. People often assume that any foreign record automatically finishes their case in Canada. That’s not always true. It’s exactly the kind of assumption a good admissibility hearing lawyer in Canada pushes back on.
Rarer, but far more serious when it comes up. This covers things like alleged involvement in terrorism, espionage, or association with organizations tied to such activity. These cases move differently. The government treats them with more weight, and so should your legal response.
Sometimes a person genuinely lies on a form. More often, in our experience, it’s something else entirely. It can be an old address left off by mistake. It can be a family detail, an agent filled in wrong years ago. The law doesn’t always distinguish neatly between deliberate deception and an honest slip. That distinction, though, is often where a defense can be built.
This one has nothing to do with criminal history. It’s about failing to meet the conditions tied to your status. You need to comply with your status in Canada, whether you are on a study visa or work permit. You may face an admissibility hearing and a removal order in case of violation. You can talk to our admissibility hearing lawyer in Canada in such cases.
If a medical condition is assessed as a danger to public health or expected to place excessive demand on Canada’s health and social systems, this ground can apply. It sounds harsh, and in some ways it is, but there are exceptions. Every case is assessed on its own facts rather than a blanket rule.
The least common of the group. This applies where someone is unable to support themselves and relies on social assistance without an acceptable explanation. It comes up occasionally, usually alongside other issues rather than on its own.
We get asked this constantly, usually by someone who’s more nervous about not knowing the process than about the outcome itself. Fair enough. Here’s how it plays out.
First, the Notice to Appear sets your date. Nothing happens before that except preparation, and this is the stage where your inadmissibility to a Canadian lawyer should already be working, not waiting.
Before the hearing, both sides exchange evidence. This is called disclosure, and it’s genuinely one of the most important parts of the whole process. Whatever the government plans to use against you, you’re entitled to see it in advance. Read it carefully. This is where weaknesses in the case usually surface.
On the day itself, the ID member hears from both sides. Evidence gets reviewed. Sometimes witnesses are called. Cross-examination happens if needed. Decisions can come the same day. They can also take weeks, depending on how complex the case is and how much the member wants to review before ruling. Simple hearings often wrap up in a single sitting lasting an hour or two. We know complicated cases can stretch across more than one date.
Four outcomes are possible, and they’re not remotely equal in severity.
Detention can also be a factor, either before the hearing or during the broader removal process. It depends on flight risk or other concerns the officer raises. If that’s part of your situation, our office also handles detention review hearings separately. It’s worth discussing alongside your admissibility case rather than after it.
Sometimes. Not always, and that distinction matters more than most people realize going in. If you receive a removal order and you’re a permanent resident or a protected person, you generally get the right to appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division
That’s your second shot, and it can include humanitarian and compassionate arguments that weren’t part of the original hearing. But if serious criminality or a security-related finding is involved, that right often disappears entirely. In those cases, judicial review at the Federal Court becomes the remaining option.
It’s worth saying clearly: judicial review isn’t a second hearing on the same facts. It’s a review of whether the process itself was handled fairly and lawfully. Different tool, different strategy, and honestly, a narrower one.
Inadmissibility doesn’t automatically mean it’s over. A few paths worth knowing about:
None of these are guaranteed options. But dismissing them without a proper case review would be a mistake too.
We’re located in Brampton and work regularly with people from Mississauga, Toronto, and other parts of the GTA. That’s not just a geography note.
It means you can walk into our office rather than deal with everything over email, if that’s what you’d prefer, though virtual consultations are always available too, including on Saturdays.
Being local also means we understand the community context these cases often sit inside: family situations, work realities, and the practical stuff that doesn’t always show up neatly in a legal file but matters to how a case gets presented.
If you’ve received a Notice to Appear, or even just a Section 44 report and you’re not sure what comes next, don’t sit on it. Call the Law Office of Karan Mahal at +1 (647) 821-0007, or fill out the consultation form. You should work with our admissibility hearing lawyer in Canada. We work with clients across Brampton, Mississauga, Toronto, and the wider GTA, in person or virtually, whichever works better for you.