I am really interested in whether, having passed all the required by-laws, one of them could be right of the Chair to declare a person “not to be heard” for continual breaches of standing orders, so that the person could be muted for the rest of the meeting.
If you are talking about strata committee meetings, then the committee has the power to agree not hear comments from non-committee members. Or to put that another way, you put forward a motion to hear owners A B and C and agree to hear only A and C.
As far as the AGM is concerned, the chair has no right to exclude owners from participating in the meeting but can control discussion, especially in a Zoom meeting. Your standing orders could include an instruction to the chair to moderate discussion that is not directly relevant to the topic on the agenda. The chair should then feel very comfortable about muting the disruptive owner when they start on one of their rants.
Let the disruptor then pursue the complaint through Fair Trading and NCAT and be sure to let them know that the committee will ask for costs to be awarded against them when you defend it, on the grounds that the complaints were vexatious and of no merit.
You might even ask that the owner undertakes in writing to behave during meetings and not embark on anti-committee rants on unrelated subjects so that their valid opinions on specific subjects can be heard. This will stand you in good stead if the owner does go to a tribunal.
Finally, we are all guilty of second-guessing the actions of owners and responses from tribunals. Sometimes it’s easier to do what needs to be done and deal with the consequences if and when they arise. No tribunal is going to impose a statutory strata manager – the ultimate sanction – on a well-run building because they silenced one extremely disruptive voice.