› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Strata Committees › strata law – what is the definition of an “owner”. › Current Page
I am surprised that NSW apparently has some mechanism to allow less than a majority of a general meeting to shut down discussion of some topic. Is that really true? What if the matter is a something that an OC can decide, a clear majority want to discuss it, and there is a motion put that they could vote on?
It seems conceivable that the matter is not a proper matter for an OC to decide. An OC can only conduct certain sorts of business. If so, I would have expected that a person objecting should put a procedural motion that the matter is ‘ultra vires’ – beyond the powers of the OC – and so should not be voted on. If that motion were lost, and the purported ultra vires motion were passed, then the person objecting could seek an order from the Tribunal to overturn the motion on the grounds that it was ultra vires and should not have passed.
If the majority make a decision that would unfairly disadvantage a minority the legal principle – that that the majority should not defraud the minority – could by applied by the tribunal when reviewing the decision.
I am in the ACT. We had an occasion when an owner, who would have had some proxies votes as well, went to the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal seeking orders that a general meeting not go ahead and not discuss a matter that she thought should not be put to a general meeting. The ACAT gave her short shrift and said that the OC could decide what to discuss and vote on at the properly constituted general meeting.