- This topic has 21 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Hello, We have an upcoming AGM. At which time we will be receiving nominations and signing people up for for the coming years EC. One vexacious resident who has often been on the committee before, is not only unhelpful and does nothing in way shape or form; she goes out of her way to be difficult and to block or derail any attempts to get things done around the block.
Question: If they are “nominated” for the EC, is there anyway to have a “No” vote and therefore not have them on the EC? Thanks in advance, N
-
Replies
-
Uncle … niece … cousin – doesn’t matter – they are not eligible.
The Body Corporate and Community Management (Standard Module) Regulation 2008 rules HERE are quite clear on this.
10 Eligibility to be a voting member
(1) A person is eligible to be a voting member of the committee if the person is an individual nominated for membership of the committee by a member of the body corporate (the nominating entity) and is also—
(a) a member of the body corporate; or
(b) a person of a following category—
(i) if the nominating entity is an individual—
(A) a member of the individual’s family; or
(B) a person acting under the authority of a power of attorney given by the individual;
OK, so what is a family member?
(3) In this section, family, of a nominating entity who is an individual, means the following persons—
(a) the individual’s spouse;
(b) each of the children of the individual or the individual’s spouse who is 18 years or more, including a step child or an adopted child;
(c) each of the individual’s parents, including a step parent;
(d) a brother or sister of the individual.
You also need to look at sections 16 and 18 of the above regulation. They require the candidate and proposer to sign a document stating their eligibility. I would include in the notice sent out to owners before the AGM that proof of family relationships (i.e. birth or marriage certificates or adoption papers) will be required for anyone proposing candidates who are family members. Failure to provide adequate proof will lead to the candidacy not being permitted.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
Thanks Jimmy.
The papers I received were not original, nor were they certified by a JP.
Different typefaces were used here and there were information is displayed and there was other tell tale signs the “so called legal documents” were completely fraudulent. I asked the candidate further information about the relationship and was told in no uncertain term term to mind my **** business.
Is there a requirement that the provide original or certified documentation? If no proper documentation can be supplied am I legally able to put aside the nomination and know it can’t be challenged at a later date?
It is used to be easy, the members on the committee ALL had to be owners or representing a corporation. This change has opened up a can or worms in our case.
@muz28 said:
Is there a requirement that the provide original or certified documentation?OK, the regulations simply state this: “Nominations must comply with section 18 and must be given to the secretary by the end of the body corporate’s financial year.” Section 18 is quoted in my previous post about eligibility.
My interpretation would be that you (or your returning officer) have to be satisfied that the candidate is eligible. If questions have been raised, all you require is proof of their eligibility which would be either by sighting original or properly authenticated (notarised) copies of birth certificates or statutory declarations of the relationship. Stat Decs are legal documents that, if they are used to deliberately misrepresent the facts, can lead to criminal charges and even jail for perjury.
If the proposer of the nomination can’t produce or refuses to produce these documents then you are entitled to refuse the nomination (in my book). I would, however, caution that you should make is as easy as humanly possible for them to provide the documents so that you can’t be accused of deliberate obstruction.
If no proper documentation can be supplied am I legally able to put aside the nomination and know it can’t be challenged at a later date?
You can’t know whether or not someone is going to challenge you in the future. But that could just as easily apply to decisions made by the EC when it turns out one of its members should never have been nominated.
Talk to a lawyer, if you are truly concerned. Or, if you are having a secret ballot, get the Returning Officer to decide. But I think it is reasonable to ask for proof when the “evidence” you have been given is far from compelling.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
In circumstances like this, if someone tells you to mind your *** business, you are justified in erring on the side of caution.
@scotlandx said:
In circumstances like this, if someone tells you to mind your *** business, you are justified in erring on the side of caution.Caution being …? Checking the bona fides of the candidate? Yeah, I thought so. Because basically, that IS very much your **** business
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
Exactly – I hope the point wasn’t lost amongst the irony.