A recent B.C. Supreme Court decision has reversed a $25,444 compensation order against a landlord, ruling that the Residential Tenancy Branch (RTB) made a “clearly irrational” error in a landlord’s use eviction case.
Landlord No Longer Required To Pay $25,444 To Former Tenant
Feng Ying Yu, a B.C. landlord, will not have to pay more than $25,000 to her former tenant, Amber Carreiro, after the Supreme Court found major flaws in the RTB arbitrator’s decision.
Earlier in 2025, the RTB ordered Yu to compensate Carreiro the equivalent of 12 months’ rent after determining that Yu’s son did not move into the unit within a “reasonable time.”
Under B.C.’s Residential Tenancy Act, landlords can end tenancy if they or an immediate family member intend to move into the rental unit. These evictions must be made in good faith, the new occupant must move in within a reasonable period, and they must live in the unit for at least 12 months or risk paying compensation.
What Happened In This Case
According to court documents issued by Justice Wendy A. Baker:
- Carreiro lived in the unit since March 2021.
- Yu served a four month eviction notice on January 23, 2025, with an effective date of May 31, 2025.
- Carreiro moved out early on March 28, leaving the unit vacant more than a month ahead of schedule.
- Yu’s son told the RTB he moved in May 9 or 10, and was still living there at the time of the RTB hearing on June 10.
- Carreiro believed no one had moved in until late May and noted seeing furniture being moved on May 27.
The RTB arbitrator rejected the testimony from Yu’s son and a friend who helped him move, calling the evidence “vague” and insufficient.
Why The Judge Said The RTB Was Wrong
Justice Baker found the arbitrator’s reasoning fundamentally flawed.
1. Testimony Was Unchallenged
Both the son and the friend testified that the move-in happened in early May. The judge said the arbitrator wrongly dismissed this unchallenged evidence and instead criticized the landlord for not presenting additional proof.
2. Move-In Timing Was Still Legally Reasonable
Whether the son moved in on May 9, May 10, or even May 27, the judge ruled the timing was still:
- Before the May 31 effective eviction date, or
- At most 10 days after the effective date
Either scenario is considered reasonable under the Residential Tenancy Act.
Justice Baker wrote that it was “clearly irrational” for the arbitrator to conclude that a move-in date within this window was unreasonable.
3. RTB Decision Was Premature
The hearing occurred only 10 days after the effective eviction date, meaning the required 12 month occupancy period had not yet passed.
Compensation for bad faith landlord’s use evictions can only be awarded if:
- The landlord does not complete the stated reason for eviction within a reasonable time, and
- The new occupant fails to live there for at least 12 months.
The second condition was impossible to evaluate at that point.
Final Outcome
Justice Baker overturned the RTB ruling entirely and dismissed the tenant’s case rather than sending it back for review.
Her written decision stated the RTB reasoning was so flawed that it could not stand:
“I find the reasoning in the RTB decision is clearly irrational and so flawed that no amount of curial deference can justify letting it stand.”
Why It Matters For B.C. Renters And Landlords
This ruling highlights how landlord’s use evictions continue to be one of the most contested areas of B.C. housing law. It also emphasizes that:
- A tenant moving out early does not change the official timeline
- Landlords must act in good faith, but RTB decisions must be grounded in evidence
- Courts can overturn RTB rulings if legal standards are not met
Expect this case to be cited in future landlord’s use disputes across British Columbia.
Subscribe to our newsletter:
Get weekly insights on home prices, real estate trends, and breaking news in Canada’s housing market.
Stay informed. Stay ahead.
Source: CTV News
Canada Housing Market 
Leave a comment