Reply To: Owner using 30 per cent veto to block removal of secretary

The reality is getting legal advice and or getting NCAT involved takes significant time and often times money. Like many other issues, 50% of the lawyers will likely argue the clause can’t be used, and the other 50% will argue it can be.

The solution that has been provided is to call a special general meeting and put the motion to vacate the secretary via a vote there. This clause obviously can’t be used at a general meeting and the democratic process will work as intended, with the decision determined by majority vote.

We have also been advised that we should no longer hold association committee meetings in future and that all meetings should be held as special general meetings to ensure this tactic can’t be used again.

Even if this part of the act can technically be used in the way it has been, there is a strong argument that it shouldn’t be. It’s not in the spirit of strata / community living to use these sort of tactics and it certainly could be strongly argued that any member attempting to block the democratic process for their own benefit is not acting in the best interests of the community association.

Let’s say we wanted to send a strong message that attempts to block the democratic process by any member for no good reason (or for self interest reasons) will not be tolerated.

We could put a motion on the special general meeting agenda to vacate this members position.

The vacating of a committee member requires a special resolution, and once again this person could use their 45% UE vote to oppose the motion to remove them.

It makes for an interesting case study as to how protection mechanisms in the act can be used in ways other than they were likely intended to be used…