A Federal Court judge halted a man's deportation to India due to his Canadian wife's ADHD-related health issues and the financial strain his departure would place on his sister.

Jagjit Singh, an Indian national, arrived in Canada on a temporary visa in 2021 seeking refugee status. He withdrew his claim after marrying L.B. on January 13, 2025, for sponsorship. 

Go Ad Free

While immigration processed his spousal sponsorship, Singh, who had overstayed his visa and was no longer seeking refugee protection, faced deportation. 

His wife met sponsorship eligibility in May, and Singh received an August removal date in July. CBSA denied his request to delay deportation until his wife's application was decided. 

Singh appealed to Canada's Federal Court and was heard Tuesday by Justice Avvy Yao-Yao Go, who rendered her decision the same day, according to the National Post.

Go stated the Officer improperly assessed evidence and misinterpreted discretion, particularly regarding irreparable harm. She clarified that irreparable harm is non-monetary, affecting not just the deported individual but anyone directly affected and remaining in Canada.

The judge cited harm to both Singh’s wife and sister in her ruling.

“In the end,” Go wrote, “taking into consideration the irreparable harm to [Singh's] spouse on the ... I find that granting the stay until the underlying [application] is determined would be just and equitable in all the circumstances of the case.”

“The evidence before the Court further indicates that the Applicant’s sister has put her house on sale in light of the Decision denying the Applicant’s request to defer his removal.”

The government claims a couple's spousal sponsorship needs more investigation for "possible bona fide concerns," implying CBSA suspects a sham marriage. Singh's lawyers argue the delay is the government's fault since no information has been requested for this probe.

Go permitted Singh to stay in Canada until that review happens.

The judge faced public backlash for releasing Singh, an illegal migrant. Critics demanded evidence-based rulings, citing the individual's illegal status and a "flimsy excuse" for remaining. Many found it "ridiculous," arguing that ADHD isn't debilitating enough to warrant such a ruling.

Go, who immigrated from Hong Kong in the 1980s, was Clinic Director of the Chinese and Southeast Asian Legal Clinic before becoming a judge. Her CBA profile notes she has "30 years of advocacy and litigation experience on behalf of low-income racialized clients."

She told the CBA, "I worked exclusively in the legal clinic system, helping low-income, racialized clients … [access] the legal system. I believe [this] work … helped me become more empathetic and open to appreciating [diverse] experiences … with the justice system."