End of Tenancy (Termination and Eviction) (19:XI) - Revision history

Nate Russell at 19:08, 9 October 2026

2026-10-09T19:08:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:08, 9 October 2026
Line 71:		Line 71:

	A tenant is eligible to end a fixed term tenancy early in the following circumstances:		A tenant is eligible to end a fixed term tenancy early in the following circumstances:
	*they or their dependant are likely at risk from family violence carried out by the tenant’s family member, as defined under the ''[https://~~www.bclaws.gov.bc~~.ca/~~civix/document/id/complete/statreg~~/~~11025_01~~ Family Law Act]'', SBC 2011, c 5 [''FLA''] (''RTA'', s 45.1(2)(a)(i));		*they or their dependant are likely at risk from family violence carried out by the tenant’s family member, as defined under the ''[https://canlii.ca/t/8q3k Family Law Act]'', SBC 2011, c 5 [''FLA''] (''RTA'', s 45.1(2)(a)(i));
	*they or any occupant are likely at risk from household violence (''RTA'', s 45.1(2)(a)(ii));		*they or any occupant are likely at risk from household violence (''RTA'', s 45.1(2)(a)(ii));
	*they have been assessed as requiring long-term care (''RTA'', s 45.1(2)(b)); or		*they have been assessed as requiring long-term care (''RTA'', s 45.1(2)(b)); or

Nate Russell: 2026 update

2026-10-09T19:07:12Z

2026 update

Show changes

LSLAP at 19:38, 13 October 2025

2025-10-13T19:38:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:38, 13 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~12 August~~ 2025}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 25 June 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = landlord}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = landlord}}

LSLAP: /* a) Good Faith */

2025-10-01T01:13:37Z

a) Good Faith

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:13, 1 October 2025
Line 187:		Line 187:
	==== a) Good Faith ====		==== a) Good Faith ====

	“Good faith” requires an honest motive, unaccompanied by any ulterior motive; whether the honest motive was the primary reason for ending the tenancy is irrelevant to the presence of ulterior motives. The burden lies on the landlord to establish good faith. For further discussion on good faith in evictions for landlord’s use, see RTB PG 2B and [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2011/2011bcsc827/2011bcsc827.html ''Gichuru v Palmar Properties Inc.'', 2011 BCSC 827].		“Good faith” requires an honest motive, unaccompanied by any ulterior motive; whether the honest motive was the primary reason for ending the tenancy is irrelevant to the presence of ulterior motives. The burden lies on the landlord to establish good faith. For further discussion on good faith in evictions for landlord’s use, see RTB PG 2B and ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2011/2011bcsc827/2011bcsc827.html Gichuru v Palmar Properties Inc.]'', 2011 BCSC 827.

	==== b) Grounds: Personal Occupancy ====		==== b) Grounds: Personal Occupancy ====

LSLAP: /* F. Either Party Gives Notice: Breach of Material Term */

2025-09-29T15:16:23Z

F. Either Party Gives Notice: Breach of Material Term

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:16, 29 September 2025
Line 332:		Line 332:
	*the tenant continued to breach the material term of the tenancy agreement after the deadline.		*the tenant continued to breach the material term of the tenancy agreement after the deadline.

	See [https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/23/13/2023BCSC1336.htm ''Ali v. British Columbia (Residential Tenancy Branch)'', 2023 BCSC 1336] for an example of a judicial review court case in which an arbitrator’s decision was overturned for being patently unreasonable due to missing a necessary element of a the test for eviction for material breach, namely that the tenant continued to breach the material term after the deadline to remedy it.		See ''[https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/23/13/2023BCSC1336.htm Ali v. British Columbia (Residential Tenancy Branch)]'', 2023 BCSC 1336 for an example of a judicial review court case in which an arbitrator’s decision was overturned for being patently unreasonable due to missing a necessary element of a the test for eviction for material breach, namely that the tenant continued to breach the material term after the deadline to remedy it.

	== G. Landlord and Tenant Agree in Writing ==		== G. Landlord and Tenant Agree in Writing ==

LSLAP: /* b) Grounds: Personal Occupancy */

2025-09-29T15:16:03Z

b) Grounds: Personal Occupancy

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:16, 29 September 2025
Line 207:		Line 207:

	The BC Reg. 49/2025 amendment expands the application of sections 42.2 and 42.3 of the RTR to include all landlord-use termination scenarios under sections 49(3), (4), and (5) of the ''RTA''—covering landlord, purchaser, and caretaker/employee use—prescribing a three-month notice period along with a 21-day dispute period from the date the tenant receives the notice.		The BC Reg. 49/2025 amendment expands the application of sections 42.2 and 42.3 of the RTR to include all landlord-use termination scenarios under sections 49(3), (4), and (5) of the ''RTA''—covering landlord, purchaser, and caretaker/employee use—prescribing a three-month notice period along with a 21-day dispute period from the date the tenant receives the notice.
	Occupation can include using the space as a home office ([https://canlii.ca/t/jjswr#par30 ''Koyanagi v Lewis'', 2021 BCSC 2062] at para 30).		Occupation can include using the space as a home office (''[https://canlii.ca/t/jjswr#par30 Koyanagi v Lewis]'', 2021 BCSC 2062 at para 30).

	However, a landlord must not give notice to end tenancy for personal occupancy grounds if the rental unit is found in a building that has 5 or more rental units and is either not strata-titled or has all rental units being owned by the same owner (''RTA'', s 49(6.1)).		However, a landlord must not give notice to end tenancy for personal occupancy grounds if the rental unit is found in a building that has 5 or more rental units and is either not strata-titled or has all rental units being owned by the same owner (''RTA'', s 49(6.1)).

LSLAP: /* d) Repeated Late Payment of Rent */

2025-09-29T15:15:40Z

d) Repeated Late Payment of Rent

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:15, 29 September 2025
Line 149:		Line 149:
	A landlord can evict a tenant if they repeatedly pay rent late (''RTA'', s 47(1)(b)). Eviction due to repeatedly late rent payments has a high threshold: although RTB PG 38 states that a minimum of three late payments is required, the existence of three late payments is in no way determinative.		A landlord can evict a tenant if they repeatedly pay rent late (''RTA'', s 47(1)(b)). Eviction due to repeatedly late rent payments has a high threshold: although RTB PG 38 states that a minimum of three late payments is required, the existence of three late payments is in no way determinative.

	In [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2020/2020bcsc380/2020bcsc380.html?resultIndex=1 ''Guevara v Louie'', 2020 BCSC 380] [''Guevara''], e-transfer delays caused rent payments to be received after the due date, and this was found to be an invalid reason to terminate a tenancy. Furthermore, if a landlord has exhibited a pattern of accepting late rent payments, the doctrine of estoppel may prevent the landlord from later relying on those past instances; in that scenario, the landlord is required to give the tenant reasonable notice that strict compliance with rent deadlines would be enforced (''Guevara'' at para 67) before counting further instances towards a finding of repeatedly late payment of rent.		In ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2020/2020bcsc380/2020bcsc380.html?resultIndex=1 Guevara v Louie]'', 2020 BCSC 380 [''Guevara''], e-transfer delays caused rent payments to be received after the due date, and this was found to be an invalid reason to terminate a tenancy. Furthermore, if a landlord has exhibited a pattern of accepting late rent payments, the doctrine of estoppel may prevent the landlord from later relying on those past instances; in that scenario, the landlord is required to give the tenant reasonable notice that strict compliance with rent deadlines would be enforced (''Guevara'' at para 67) before counting further instances towards a finding of repeatedly late payment of rent.

	==== e) By Government Order ====		==== e) By Government Order ====

LSLAP: /* B. Requirements of Notices to End Tenancy */

2025-09-29T15:15:20Z

B. Requirements of Notices to End Tenancy

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:15, 29 September 2025
Line 28:		Line 28:
	Dates are self-corrective (''RTA'', s 53), so notice is not void simply because a landlord proposes to have the tenancy end on a date sooner than the ''RTA'' allows.		Dates are self-corrective (''RTA'', s 53), so notice is not void simply because a landlord proposes to have the tenancy end on a date sooner than the ''RTA'' allows.

	In [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2024/2024bcsc2406/2024bcsc2406.html ''Mangat v Dhindsa'', 2024 BCSC 2406] (Mangat), the British Columbia Supreme Court reviewed a decision by an RTB arbitrator who had dismissed a tenant’s compensation claim under section 51 of the ''RTA''. The tenant had moved out of a rental unit after receiving an eviction notice from the landlord, who stated he intended to use the unit for personal use. However, the tenant later discovered that the landlord had rented the unit to someone else instead. The arbitrator rejected the tenant’s claim on the grounds that the landlord had not used the prescribed RTB form for a personal-use eviction, concluding that no formal notice under section 49 had been issued. The Court found this decision to be patently unreasonable, emphasising that the legislative intent of section 51 is to protect tenants from bad-faith evictions (''Mangat'' at para 14). The Court ruled that the landlord’s non-compliance with the format requirements could not be used to deny the tenant relief and directed the RTB to reconsider the case.		In ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2024/2024bcsc2406/2024bcsc2406.html Mangat v Dhindsa]'', 2024 BCSC 2406 (Mangat), the British Columbia Supreme Court reviewed a decision by an RTB arbitrator who had dismissed a tenant’s compensation claim under section 51 of the ''RTA''. The tenant had moved out of a rental unit after receiving an eviction notice from the landlord, who stated he intended to use the unit for personal use. However, the tenant later discovered that the landlord had rented the unit to someone else instead. The arbitrator rejected the tenant’s claim on the grounds that the landlord had not used the prescribed RTB form for a personal-use eviction, concluding that no formal notice under section 49 had been issued. The Court found this decision to be patently unreasonable, emphasising that the legislative intent of section 51 is to protect tenants from bad-faith evictions (''Mangat'' at para 14). The Court ruled that the landlord’s non-compliance with the format requirements could not be used to deny the tenant relief and directed the RTB to reconsider the case.

	=== 2. Date of Receipt ===		=== 2. Date of Receipt ===

LSLAP: /* - a) Effective Date of the Notice = */

2025-09-22T10:54:52Z

- a) Effective Date of the Notice =

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:54, 22 September 2025
Line 93:		Line 93:
	A landlord may give a notice to end a tenancy if rent is unpaid on any day after the day it is due (''RTA'', s 46(1)). If a tenant fails to pay the utilities, the landlord can give written notice demanding payment; if the payment remains unpaid for over 30 days after the tenant receives the written demand, the landlord can treat the unpaid amount as unpaid rent for the purposes of ending the tenancy (''RTA'', s 46(6)).		A landlord may give a notice to end a tenancy if rent is unpaid on any day after the day it is due (''RTA'', s 46(1)). If a tenant fails to pay the utilities, the landlord can give written notice demanding payment; if the payment remains unpaid for over 30 days after the tenant receives the written demand, the landlord can treat the unpaid amount as unpaid rent for the purposes of ending the tenancy (''RTA'', s 46(6)).

	===- a) Effective Date of the Notice ====		==== a) Effective Date of the Notice ====

	A notice to end tenancy for non-payment of rent is effective 10 days after the tenant receives the notice (''RTA'', s 46(1)).		A notice to end tenancy for non-payment of rent is effective 10 days after the tenant receives the notice (''RTA'', s 46(1)).

Nate Russell: review confirmed 2025

2025-08-29T01:41:01Z

review confirmed 2025

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:41, 29 August 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= August ~~15, 2024~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 12 August 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = landlord}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = landlord}}