The appellants, permanent residents ordered deported for serious criminality, appealed their removal orders under the former Immigration Act, triggering automatic stays.
Before their appeals were heard, the new Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) came into force.
Section 196 of the IRPA discontinued pending appeals for serious criminals unless they had been 'granted a stay'.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that 'granted a stay' refers only to actively ordered stays, not automatic statutory stays.
Applying principles of bilingual statutory interpretation, the Court found the narrower English version aligned with Parliament's intent to expedite the removal of serious criminals.
The Court also dismissed arguments that the retroactive removal of the appeal right violated section 7 of the Charter, concluding that deportation does not inherently implicate section 7 interests and the transitional scheme did not breach principles of fundamental justice.
