Ndungu v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

canada, canadian, case law, court opinion, canlii, fct, 2026canlii93750, 2026 canlii 93750 (fc), 2026, canlii, 93750, (fc), imm-22130-26, 2026, citizenship and immigration, removal, pre, removal risk assessment, stay of removal pending leave and judicial review of negative prra, motion to stay removal until determination of underlying application, conjunctive three, part test for a stay considered, serious issue not established due to extension of time failure, stay motion dismissed, procedure, stays, interlocutory relief, rjr, macdonald inc v canada (attorney general) test, whether underlying judicial review raises a serious issue, requirement to demonstrate serious issue before irreparable harm and balance of convenience, court declines to consider remaining branches after finding no serious issue, motion dismissed, limitation periods, extensions of time, immigration and refugee protection act, para. 72(2)(b) and para. 72(2)(c), notice of application filed beyond 15, day deadline, whether “special reasons” support an extension and a reasonable possibility it will be granted, interests of justice and larkman factors applied, extension not reasonably possible, motion dismissed, evidence, affidavits, extension of time record, whether applicant provided evidence addressing continuing intention, potential merit, prejudice, and reasonable explanation, statements in notice of application are not evidence, affidavit does not address asserted “special reasons”, absence of necessary factual foundations for extension request, motion dismissed