Again, squatting is not the issue, but human decency. If the owner would give her/his consent, it would be really hard for a squatter (given that she/he has human decency) to oppose eviction, given a good reason for why she/he has to leave.

But when consent wasn't given in the first place, the duty to leave when given a good reason vanishes?

It's some pretty curious moral arithmetic you've got going on there.

I don't know. Threre are numerous examples of a consent being given after squatters move in. In most cases the owner has nothing to loose, so a consent makes perfect sense if you want to keep good comunication with those who are using your property.

And there are numerous examples of squatters who don't leave when given a good reason. Squatters who have the consent of the landlord aren't really squatters in any meaningful sense.

And relied on not to trash the place.