Manitoba Eviction Law 2025: Landlords Need Only Show a Significant Safety Risk in Trafficking Cases

That protection matters because it allows investigators to actually participate in these proceedings without jeopardizing separate criminal investigations; without it, an investigator might decline to testify at all rather than risk exposing a confidential source, which would have left landlords without a key evidence source despite the amendment's broader intent.

5. Why this amendment doesn't eliminate a landlord's obligation to establish the underlying activity

Even with the lower significant-risk standard and the automatic deeming for these 3 activities, a landlord still has to establish that the underlying unlawful activity, trafficking or human trafficking, actually occurred at the unit.

[Cite: Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, S.M. 2025, c. 28]

A landlord relying on this provision needs to build an actual evidentiary case connecting the unit to one of these specific activities; the amendment makes the risk element easier to satisfy once that connection is shown, but it doesn't remove the need to show the connection itself.

6. Why a landlord should document a timeline that supports testimony from third parties, not just personal observation

Since the amendment specifically opens the door to testimony from police, emergency responders, and community organizations, a landlord building a termination case benefits from documenting incidents in a way that aligns with what those third parties might independently corroborate.

[Cite: Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, S.M. 2025, c. 28]

A landlord who's reported suspicious activity to police or who has documented interactions with building staff about specific incidents is in a stronger position to benefit from this amendment's expanded evidence provisions than one relying solely on personal suspicion without any third-party record to point to.

7. Why this change reflects a broader policy response to trafficking specifically, not unlawful activity generally

The amendment singles out controlled substance trafficking, illegal cannabis sales, and human trafficking for automatic significant-risk deeming, rather than lowering the risk standard for unlawful activity broadly.

[Cite: Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, S.M. 2025, c. 28, new s. 96(3.1)]

A landlord dealing with a different kind of unlawful activity at a unit, one not among these 3 specifically named categories, shouldn't assume the same lowered significant-risk standard automatically applies; this amendment's deeming provision is targeted specifically at trafficking-related conduct.

8. Why the immediate-risk standard likely still applies outside these 3 deemed categories

Since the amendment specifically replaces the immediate-risk standard with significant-risk for short-notice terminations generally, but only deems 3 specific activities as automatically meeting that standard, other unlawful-activity terminations may still require the landlord to actually demonstrate the significant risk rather than relying on automatic deeming.

[Cite: Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, S.M. 2025, c. 28, ss. 96(3), 96(3.1)]

A landlord pursuing a termination for unlawful activity outside the 3 deemed categories should confirm with the Residential Tenancies Branch or a qualified attorney whether the significant-risk standard applies automatically or still requires independent proof for that specific type of activity.

9. Why a tenant facing this kind of application should understand the new evidentiary landscape

A tenant contesting a termination application brought under this amendment should expect the director to potentially weigh testimony from sources beyond the landlord directly, including police and community organizations.

[Cite: Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, S.M. 2025, c. 28]

A tenant disputing the underlying allegation needs to address that broader evidentiary picture, not just the landlord's own claims, since the amendment specifically expanded who can provide relevant testimony in these proceedings.

10. Why a property manager should update internal reporting protocols to align with this amendment's evidentiary structure

Since testimony from building staff is now explicitly recognized as potential evidence in these proceedings, a property manager should ensure staff document and report suspected trafficking-related activity consistently.

[Cite: Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, S.M. 2025, c. 28, new s. 154(1.0.3)]

A property manager who trains staff to document specific observations, dates, and details around suspected unlawful activity builds a stronger evidentiary record that can support a termination application under this amendment's framework, rather than relying on vague or undocumented staff impressions after the fact.

11. What property managers should do now

The practical starting point is training on-site staff to document specific, dated observations connected to suspected trafficking activity, since staff testimony is now explicitly recognized as part of the evidentiary picture under this amendment.

Building a working relationship with local police or Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods investigators for reporting suspected activity gives a landlord access to the kind of third-party testimony this amendment specifically designed the process to accommodate.