Homax Real Estate Services v. Arde, 2025 BCSC 2431

This judicial review addressed whether a property manager, rather than the property owner, can be held liable for compensation under s. 51(2) of the Residential Tenancy Act. The owner had ended a tenancy to move into the unit but moved out before the twelve-month occupancy period required by the Act had run, and the tenants applied for compensation — naming the property manager as the landlord. The Court confirmed that the Act's definition of "landlord" expressly includes the owner's agent, and that the obligation to pay s. 51 compensation rests on the landlord as statutorily defined, not on principles of contract or privity. The decision is a useful authority on the breadth of landlord liability under the Act: an agent who receives a dispute notice and declines to alert the owner or apply to add them as a party cannot avoid the resulting liability.

Link to the full decision here: https://canlii.ca/t/kgx2l