• Kingwell Immigration

    You found your home.
    Establish roots with
    Kingwell Immigration Law.

    Kingwell Immigration Law is dedicated to providing you and your loved ones with the very best in immigration law representation. Whether you need help with a routine application, or face deportation and need urgent legal support – our team will stand with you to make Canada your family's future.

    Contact Kingwell Immigration Law Today

About.

The legal support you choose today will impact the opportunities your family has tomorrow.

Kingwell Immigration Law was created with one clear intention: to deliver legal services that are strong, impactful, and considerate of the person, not just the law. Where other lawyers see a case, we see a person – that means no matter will ever be too challenging, intricate, or complex for our team.

Regardless of the situation, we will fight for your right to build a future in Canada – that’s our promise. 

Team.

  • Daniel Kingwell

    Founder

    Daniel is a seasoned immigration lawyer with over 20 years of experience, heading a team representing clients in all areas of immigration law. As a leading immigration litigator, he has successfully represented hundreds of clients in resolving complex immigration issues. In the Federal Court, he has won countless applications for leave, judicial review, and stays of removal. At the Immigration and Refugee Board, he has resolved highly contested admissibility hearings, detention reviews, removal and sponsorship appeals, and refugee claims. In federal and provincial courts, he has sought civil remedies for wrongful detention.

    Prior to founding Kingwell Immigration Law, Daniel was a partner and litigation team leader at an immigration law firm recognized by his peers in Canadian Lawyer magazine as one of the very best in Canada. A lawyer’s lawyer, he regularly receives referrals from other counsel, entrusting him with their clients, family, and friends. He is frequently consulted by media, educators, and community leaders for his opinion and advice.

    What sets Daniel apart is his unique combination of skill, experience, and commitment to his clients’ needs. From his many years of practice, he is able to cut to the core of the issue to find the most efficient solution to any immigration problem. This requires a level of understanding of the law and the system that can only come from his decades of experience.

    Daniel never forgets that his clients’ ability to enter or remain in Canada is crucial to their lives. He is ready to fight for them tirelessly, to ensure they can remain with their family, their community, and their livelihood.

    • Canadian Bar Association
    • Osgoode
    • CILA
    • OBA
    • RLA

Testimonials.

  • My husband and I want to start off by thanking Daniel Kingwell and his team for all the amazing work they did for us and the support they gave us during a very stressful time in our lives. When there was so much uncertainty, Daniel always gave us the assurance that he and his team will do everything they can to see us through and they sure did deliver. We will recommend Daniel to anyone facing immigration issues. His firm delivered time and time again, my husband and I are so blessed we had them on our side. They are truly life savers and my family and I will always be grateful to Daniel and his firm.

    — Samantha Oorloff & Jesse Wijayasinghe
  • Thank you Daniel for doing a great job!!! My student visa application was refused two times and the Embassy totally ignored my third request too. Honestly, I was hopeless in 2019 and could not even imagine that someday the court will grant leave and my passport will have a visa on it. Everything happened because of Daniel Kingwell who prepared the best arguments and defended my case with great professionalism. I am so grateful for your support Daniel. Definitely I would recommend your firm to everyone who needs legal services because you guys deserve to be appreciated!

    — Daniela Gega
  • Our immigration case was rather peculiar. But, having been introduced to Daniel Kingwell at a later stage in the process, we have had nothing but outstanding, professional help in all our legal matters. The knowledge of Mr. Kingwell regarding immigration matters is second to none, and his team is truly is amazing. Not only is Mr. Kingwell's knowledge and experience extremely extensive, but the manner in which he makes his clients feel at ease is beyond anything that we have had the experience of dealing with (having met a whole tranche of lawyers, I can safely testify to that). I would definitely recommend Mr. Kingwell for all immigration related matters.

    — Haseeb A Virk
  • Our situation wasn’t the best one to begin with. My husband had been treated unfairly, and we had an urgent situation. The previous lawyer wasn’t enough, and we needed someone who’d treat us better. My husband’s rights mattered. Unfortunately, the previous lawyer just wasn’t like that. In a wild chase, we came across Daniel Kingwell. Just as we thought all hope was lost, we had found our miracle. We set up a meeting, and met each other. They learned our case, and saved us. Countless meetings later, we managed to find a great price and win the first of many cases. Daniel Kingwell and his fellow colleagues have been a huge part in our lives, and we cannot thank them enough. I truly recommend them. Appreciation and Thanks, Selma and family. 

    — Selma Shreet
  • I cannot say enough positive things about my experience with Daniel Kingwell. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Daniel for all his help he has done for me during one of the most difficult time of my life. I had a very difficult case and Daniel put everything together to make it happen. I was very impressed by his professional approach. He is very knowledgeable lawyer with a very friendly personality.

    — G.M.
  • We met Daniel Kingwell at a very crucial point in our long and most difficult immigration journey. We were completely taken aback by his humility, honesty and straightforward nature. It was refreshing to work with a lawyer who would not give us false assurances, ask for money or unnecessarily delay the proceedings, after all the bad experiences we had with a previous lawyer. It is Dan's patience and constant support as well as that of his team that has provided my family the sanity and support required through this long journey to gain permanent residency. I wish no one ever goes through the struggles that we underwent with immigration, but if you ever do. I can only recommend one thing. Go to Daniel Kingwell, the best, honest and knowledgeable immigration lawyer.

    — L. Dolkar
  • The best lawyer I and my husband met, Daniel Kingwell, gave us great help and comfort. Our immigration case was a really complicated and hard journey, and yet it was a blessing to meet Daniel Kingwell in a time of much pain. He made thorough preparations and responses to give us legal help in our appeal. His attorney's fees were very reasonable. My family is very grateful. If you need an honest and professional immigration lawyer, I strongly recommend Daniel Kingwell. 

    — Mrs. Yoon

In the News.

  • Financial Times

Past Cases.

  • A.M. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2023 FC 128)

    Family of permanent residents from Pakistan. They were previously granted refugee status and permanent residence on the basis of the risk to them as Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan. When they returned to Pakistan for two visits, CBSA filed a cessation application to the RPD to take away their refugee and PR status. The RPD granted CBSA’s application, and we appealed the decision to the Federal Court. On appeal, we convinced the Court that the RPD had misunderstood the legal tests, their reasons for returning for important personal reasons, and the precautions they took to be safe. The Court quashed the RPD’s decision and restored their permanent resident and refugee status.

  • S.A. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2023 FC 146)

    Family from Pakistan. They had filed refugee claims and an application for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds which were both refused. We successfully appealed the H&C decision to the Federal Court on the basis that the officer had failed to properly assess medical evidence. IRCC was ordered to reconsider their application.

  • Martins v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2023 FC 128)

    Visitor from Portugal who overstayed his visa. He was dependent on his family in Canada because of his cognitive impairment due to a childhood injury. His family applied for him for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. IRCC rejected the application and CBSA scheduled his removal. We filed an appeal and a stay motion in Federal Court, stopped his removal, and overturned the refusal, convincing the Court that the officer had ignored medical evidence of his dependency on his family in Canada for support, faulted him for the decision to remain in Canada that he had not made, and failing to consider the “best interests of the child” as an adult due to his impairments. He was allowed to remain in Canada to finalize his application.

  • M.M. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2022 FC 1098)

    Study permit applicant from Iran. IRCC rejected her application finding that her study plan was not logical in light of her education history. We successfully appealed to the Federal Court, arguing that the reasons were insufficient to justify the decision, and the application was sent back to IRCC for reconsideration.

  • Doresi v Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (2022 FC 1300)

    Refugee claimant from Albania. For a decade, he fought his case with the Minister at the Refugee Protection Division, who argued that he should be excluded from protection because of a criminal conviction. We successfully appealed the decision to the Federal Court on the basis that he was wrongfully convicted in his absence, and the RPD was ordered to redetermine his claim.

  • D.G. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2021 FC 1468)

    Citizen from Albania applying for a study permit.  IRCC rejected it, stating that her study plan was not reasonable given her education history. She requested reconsideration which IRCC also rejected. We appealed both decisions to the Federal Court overturned the rejection, the Court agreeing that the officer had ignored her explanation that the course of studies was more specialized than her previous education and necessary for her career advancement. IRCC was required to reconsider her study permit application.

  • Lakatos v Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (2020 FC 349)

    Roma family from Hungary. The family had filed various applications for permanent residence, including a humanitarian and compassionate application for some members, and a dependent protected person application for another. Before IRCC had determined the applications, CBSA booked them for removal. We successfully obtained a stay of removal from the Federal Court on the basis of the outstanding PR applications and a medical risk to some family members. They were allowed to remain in Canada while their applications were finalized.

  • A.H. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2020 FC 530)

    Overseas sponsorship of conjugal partner from Saudi Arabia. IRCC refused the application on the basis that they did not meet the requirements of conjugal partner, and the Immigration Appeal Division rejected their appeal. We represented them on appeal to the Federal Court, and the judge overturned the decision, agreeing that the officer and IAD had improperly considered their individual and relationship histories. Their PR application was returned to IRCC for processing.

  • A.M. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2019 FC 270)

    Pre-Removal Risk Assessment applicant from Iran. He maintained that he was at risk in Iran for attending political demonstrations. IRCC refused his application, finding that he had not provided sufficient evidence of risk. We appealed to the Federal Court and the decision was overturned, the Court agreeing that the officer had improperly rejected new evidence of ongoing danger. The Court ordered IRCC to reconsider the PRRA application.