@Lady Penelope said:
From my understanding of the Act the word ‘may’ indicates that it is an optional provision. The Act would say ‘must’ if it was mandatory.
That’s one interpretation, for sure. There is a difference between “may” and “must”.
But in this context – specifically your suggestion of a by-law that says no nominations could be made at the meeting – that would change “may” to “may not” and would therefore be in conflict with the Act (IMHO).
By the way, I think there is a lot of window dressing in the Act that doesn’t stand up to close scrutiny.
For instance, how can the law give ordinary owners the right to attend strata committee meetings and yet also allow “paper” or online meetings where owners can’t actually attend?
And yes, electronic voting is one very effective way around the proxy problem but I think it should be restricted to non-resident owners. Otherwise the existing very poor levels of engagement will only get worse.
I recently heard about a block of 300 units where only three owners turned up for the AGM.