The applicants sought an interlocutory injunction to prevent the City of Toronto from clearing a homeless encampment, arguing the bylaw authorizing the clearance breached section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The court applied the three-part test for interlocutory injunctions.
While a serious issue was found, the court determined that the irreparable harm was minimal given the City's offer of hotel shelter accommodation to encampment residents.
The balance of convenience heavily favored the City due to significant fire risks at the encampment and the availability of safer alternative housing.
The motion for an interlocutory injunction was dismissed.
