Evicted residents not required to remove mobile homes off B.C. reserve lands: Court

Songhees First Nation Chief Ron Sam looks on at the first-ever translation of the Douglas Treaties during a ceremony at the Songhees Wellness Centre in Esquimalt, B.C. Saturday, Feb. 25, 2017. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chad Hipolito

The B.C. Court of Appeal has ruled that residents evicted from a mobile home park on Songhees Nation lands on Vancouver Island no longer have to remove their homes from the property, but they aren’t entitled to compensation for leaving them there.

Residents of the E. George Estates Manufactured Home Park were ordered to vacate the lands last year by the B.C. Supreme Court, after being given three years’ notice by the Songhees that their tenancies were ending.

Songhees Chief Ron Sam said at the time that some of their members were living in “unsafe housing” off reserve, and the mobile home park was being cleared out to make way for “urgently needed community housing.”

The lower court found the mobile homes were “chattels” on the lands and must be removed, rather than “fixtures” that would be allowed to remain.

The B.C. Court of Appeal, however, found the mobile homes were “fixtures” and the lower court judge made an error by ordering evicted residents to remove them after their tenancies were terminated.

Michael Drouillard, a lawyer for the evicted residents, said Wednesday that his clients have had much difficulty since being forced to leave, including one man who is now living in a tent.

“He’s homeless now. The problem is that basically they lost their equity and are now thrust into the current market of rentals, which is very costly rent compared to what they were paying,” he said. “It’s been a rough time for my clients so far. I’ve not heard any good stories.”

He said they put most of their life savings into buying the mobile homes, believing they’d be able to live in them for the rest of their lives, and the case is a cautionary tale for any prospective buyers to ensure they know exactly what they’re buying into.

“This case shows that it’s not enough to just use a standard form contract and buy, you have to have a professional advising you and explaining to you what exactly you’re getting in terms of your interest in the land,” he said.

“It’s not a happy ending.”

The ruling says the mobile homes are of “no value” to the Songhees Nation, which wants them removed, and the nation did nothing to mislead the tenants about their legal rights.

“There is, with respect, nothing unfair or inequitable about Songhees Nation exercising its legal rights to reclaim this part of its reserve land for the use of its members,” the ruling says.

Kaelan Unrau, lawyer for the Songhees Nation, said the ruling was an important and fair result that recognized how the nation acted toward the park’s residents, giving considerable notice far beyond what the law requires.

“The nation has long been facing a serious housing crisis. It has a very limited land base. Many members of the nation are unable to reside on the reserve and the court has reached a result that will allow the nation to go ahead and reclaim these lands for the benefits of its members and community,” Unrau said.

Unrau also said the case highlights the need for buyers to know exactly what they’re getting.

“What the court really emphasizes is that when people are dealing with manufactured home parks on the reserve context ... everyone involved just really needs to do due diligence,” he said.

Unrau said the issue on appeal was what would happen to the mobile homes that remained on the lands, and the Songhees Nation can now move ahead to help members “living in extremely precarious housing situations, both off reserve or on reserve.”

“This court case has erected a huge obstacle to moving forward with any plans for redevelopment, and this Court of Appeal decision has removed that obstacle,” he said.

This report by Darryl Greer, The Canadian Press, was first published April 15, 2026.