BC Supreme Court confirms $41K penalty for family-use eviction breach
The case began on March 2, 2024, when Aslam served a handwritten notice asking the Morneaus to vacate a house divided into three suites by June 30, 2024. The notice cited a planned “big renovation” and intended use by his children.
The Morneaus vacated early, on May 1, 2024, paying $3,440 per month in rent at the time. They subsequently applied to the RTB for compensation, alleging the landlord had not carried out the eviction’s stated purpose.
The RTB found that while Aslam’s son and daughter had moved into the lower suite after the tenancy ended, the landlord failed to establish they occupied the upper suite.
A written statement from a third-party occupant, accepted as evidence at the RTB hearing, described what the arbitrator found to be two independent households, not the shared occupancy the landlord claimed.
What the court confirmed
Justice Lamb rejected all three grounds raised in Aslam’s petition. The court confirmed that BC’s Residential Tenancy Act (RTA) governs how tenancies end, regardless of the terms in any private agreement.
