Murray Wood: Carney not rising to Trump's threats around CUSMA
Murray Wood says U.S. President Donald Trump seems to be at the bluster-and-threaten stage of trade negotiations. He say...
VICTORIA — The B.C. Supreme Court has found that the City of Victoria did not go beyond its authority by passing bylaws restricting overnight camping in some city parks.
Three homeless petitioners sought to quash two bylaws passed by the city in 2024 and 2025 that prohibited “temporary overnight sheltering” in Irving and Victoria West parks.
Petitioners Krystle Fox, Kimberly Scheu and Shea Smith claimed the city exceeded its authority by enacting bylaws that didn’t properly consider whether washrooms were available where camping was allowed, or account for international legal obligations affirming the peoples’ rights to housing and water.
The ruling said Scheu is now housed and Smith is now deceased, and the action continued with just Fox as the petitioner with “private interest standing.”
The ruling said that “courts have recognized that when there are inadequate accessible indoor shelter spaces to accommodate persons genuinely experiencing homelessness, those persons are entitled to erect temporary overnight shelters in public parks.”
“The difficult circumstances faced by the petitioners and other unhoused persons in finding and maintaining adequate shelter are not disputed,” the judge wrote.
“Nor is the fact that there are insufficient indoor shelter spaces available for unhoused persons in the city. The city thus accepts that it cannot enact a complete prohibition on temporary overnight sheltering in its parks.”
The court found the city was within its authority to enact the bylaws and dismissed the petition, but left the door open for an action to “directly challenge the constitutionality of the bylaws.”
B.C. Human Rights Commissioner Kasari Govender was an intervener in the case and said in a statement that she was disappointed with the decision.
She said the ruling “presents another obstacle to unhoused people seeking to challenge municipal bylaws that undermine their rights and dignity.”
“People with disabilities and Indigenous peoples are significantly more likely to be unhoused,” she said.
Alexander Kirby, the petitioners’ lawyer, said they are “considering our options going forward.”
The petitioners, the court found, had mistakenly tried to claim that the question whether the bylaw was unconstitutional was “settled,” rather than “a disputed constitutional question.”
“The constitutionality of the 2025 bylaw remains to be determined,” Justice Jacqueline Hughes wrote.
“That determination cannot be made on the record presently before the Court. It requires the evidentiary rigours and procedural safeguards that customarily apply in a constitutional challenge proceeding by way of civil action.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 12, 2026
The Canadian Press
