Christianah Olanipekun has obtained a temporary reprieve allowing her to remain in Canada after telling a federal court that returning to Nigeria would expose her to trauma and stigmatisation as a childless, ageing woman in a society where “women are believed to be the architects of their condition.”
Judge Darren R Thorne of the federal court in Ottawa, Ontario, on July 15, 2025, approved Mrs Olanipekun’s application for judicial review of her asylum rejection through Canada’s Human and Compassionate immigration pathway, often called H & C.
Mrs Olanipekun entered Canada in 2014 on a student visa and completed two postgraduate diplomas between 2014 and 2016. She obtained a postgraduate work permit that expired in April 2020. She was able to secure another study permit as a continuing care assistant, enabling her to work through the pandemic. Her husband joined her in Canada in 2022.
When the federal government opened a pathway for temporary residents to transition to permanent residency, Mrs Olanipekun applied but was rejected.
An officer of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) had ruled her ineligible on the grounds that she graduated in December 2016, while the temporary-to-permanent resident programme applied only to graduates who completed their studies from January 2017.
Mrs Olanipekun, thereafter, explored the H&C as a last resort to continue her stay in Canada, claiming that her inability to conceive a child after several years of marriage would make her an object of ridicule in Nigeria, where women are frequently scorned and blamed for childlessness.
She also explained that she was treating a medical condition while receiving other fertility treatments in Canada, and that exiting the country would not only disrupt her medical routine but could also have adverse effects on her health.
To buttress her argument, Mrs Olanipekun submitted an excerpt from a Nigerian blog post discussing infertility and societal attitudes towards childless women.
“Other women do look down on the childless women, most of the time believing that the childless women are the architects of their own condition,” the excerpt said. “The unfavourable attitude exhibited against the childless women by other women includes gossip, scornful laughter, downgrading looks…”
But the immigration officer deflated Mrs Olanipekun’s claims, noting that unfavourable comments alone do not qualify her for Canada’s Humanitarian and Compassionate relief, adding that her husband will support her reintegration to Nigeria.
The officer further opined that a Google search showed Nigeria has fertility clinics where she could continue her treatment.
The IRCC officer said Mrs Olanipekun was only exploring the H&C pathway after failing to qualify for permanent residency through the temporary-to-permanent route, adding that the humanitarian programme could not be used as a substitute.
Her H&C application was consequently refused, a decision Mrs Olanipekun challenged as unreasonable before the federal court in Ottawa.
Having reviewed the IRCC decision and Mrs Olanipekun’s explanations, Judge Thorne agreed that the immigration officer was “unreasonable” to diminish her pain and trauma to mere “unfavourable comments.”
Mr Thorne also ruled that there were no thresholds for determining the circumstances that qualify for humanitarian and compassionate relief. He therefore ordered that Mrs Olanipekun’s application be reviewed by a different immigration officer.
“For these reasons, this application for judicial review is granted,” Mr Thorne wrote in his ruling on July 15, 2025. “The decision of the officer dated November 17, 2023, is set aside, and the matter is returned for redetermination by a different immigration officer.”
The decision gives Mrs Olanipekun a further stay in Canada, pending the re-examination and re-determination of her H&C application, which could take a few years.
