BC Courts Criticized for Granting Injunctions Against Homeless Encampments
A new analysis conducted by the University of British Columbia reveals concerning issues surrounding the approval of injunctions against homeless encampments by BC courts. The report, titled Rush to Judgment, examines 24 injunction decisions made between 2000 and 2022 and highlights the disturbing findings. Professor Stepan Wood, an expert in Law, Society, and Sustainability, describes the results as alarming and sheds light on the courts’ eagerness to grant such injunctions.
The study found that 75% of government requests for injunctions were granted, including a 25% approval rate for final injunctions and an 85% success rate for temporary interlocutory injunctions. This high approval rate is concerning because injunctions are intended to be drastic measures when no other option is available. Wood emphasizes that courts frequently grant injunctions before the government has even proven its legal claims against the homeless encampments.
The report suggests that when issues and evidence are carefully examined, courts are more likely to rule in favor of homeless encampment residents. Additionally, it raises concerns about relaxed legal tests used in interlocutory cases, which downplay the considerations of irreparable harm and balance of convenience.
This analysis comes in the wake of the eviction of an encampment on Hastings Street in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside last spring. The Vancouver City ordered the removal due to health and safety concerns, including fire risks. Residents of the encampment expressed their belief that homelessness will worsen in the coming months, citing difficulties in accessing housing and the scarcity of available options.
Wood’s report concludes that until governments prioritize effective implementation of the right to housing, establish a robust social safety net, and engage in genuine reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples, encampments will continue to persist and multiply.
Responding to the report, Premier David Eby acknowledged the challenges faced by the BC government regarding the circumstances under which municipalities can remove encampments and the definition of adequate shelter. Eby mentioned the Crab Park encampment as an example, where the park board failed to obtain an injunction due to its inability to prove the availability of suitable alternative shelters.
However, Eby stressed that encampments are not safe or a solution to the housing crisis. In April, the BC government announced the Homes for People project as part of its efforts to address the housing shortage, including measures to increase construction, regulate real estate prices, and create more rental units.
Advocates and community members argue that a comprehensive solution is needed, including increased shelter spaces and the construction of accessible housing with appropriate support services. They suggest exploring proposals such as tiny homes and prioritizing these solutions before resorting to clearing encampments, especially during the winter when people seek safety and community through these encampments.
The alarming findings of the report call for a reevaluation of the current approach to homelessness and the urgency to address it effectively. Critics argue that the high approval rate of injunctions against homeless encampments reflects a systemic failure to provide adequate housing and support for vulnerable individuals. Only by committing to long-term solutions can the cycle of encampments persisting and multiplying be broken, offering hope for those experiencing homelessness in BC.
