- This topic has 6 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
As I understand it the act is silent on speaking rights. At a recent meeting I attended our new strata manager has denied a proxy the right to speak as the act said that they had a vote then he was ruling from the chair that the proxy could not vote. The owner who wanted me to speak for them was also present and he also indicated that as she had appointed a proxy she could not speak either. He refused to debate this and “abarndoned” the meeting without a vote. Interestingly joint owners who the act says also in effect are proxies were allowed to speak as were company nominees and people with a power of attorney.
Should we go to the CTT?
-
Replies
-
The Act isn't silent on speaking rights, as it turns out.
14 Owners’ attendance at executive committee meetings
An owner or, where that person is a corporation, any company nominee of the corporation is entitled to attend a meeting of the executive committee but may not address the meeting unless authorised by resolution of the executive committee.
That means owners can attend Executive Committee meetings and they can speak but only if the Executive Committee votes in favour of that.
It seems bizarre that the proxy wasn't allowed to speak because they were a proxy and the owner wasn't allowed to speak becasue they'd brought a proxy – the chairman can't have it both ways.
But the chairman shouldn't be making these ad hoc rulings. The Act quite clearly says this is a decision for the EC to make as a whole.
The chair has to be allowed to exercise some degree of control over proceedings but denying owners or their proxies the chance to speak could (and probably should) lead to them being removed from the chairmanship (by the Executive committee ) or the EC completely (by a vote at a general meeting).
The CTTT is unlikely to rule on meeting procedure unless there is some serious issue that isn't being addressed, to the detriment of the strata plan, because the chairman has a vested interest in it not being discussed.
But short of that, there are plenty of democratic mechanisms for dealing with strata bullies, as a recent Flat Chat column explained.
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.
Ahh … well, now your chairman's actions make even less sense.
To be honest, we can quote the Act and regulations and CTTT rulings till the cows come home but if your chairman is a bully or just doesn't want any dissenting voices to be heard, nobody's going to put him in jail for playing fast and loose with the processes of the Owners Corporation.
By far the easiest thing to do is get rid of them by direct (democratic) action.
Have a look at this column which should give you a few ideas. But why not take him to Fair Trading and the CTTT to establish once and for all what he should have done and must do in the future. It could be a crucial step in letting your fellow owners know that his time is up.
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.
Hi All,
I don't think a proxie is valid when the owner appointing the proxie is present at a meeting? So it should have I think been one or the other allowed to speak or vote at the meeting. Not sure actually why a proxie is appointed if the owner is available?
Cheers
CBF
My understanding is that the Proxy is not valid if the proxy giver is present and voting. I've known a few cases where an owner has given a proxy to their lawyer or a relative to speak on their behalf but wanted to be there to hear what was said. They may even be able to speak.
This is what the Act says:
Proxy cannot vote if person appointing proxy votes
A proxy cannot exercise a vote in relation to a matter if the person who appointed the proxy is exercising personally a power to vote on that matter.That section certainly says nothing about speaking at the meeting. The weird thing about this case was that the chairman ruled that the proxy wasn't valid but then ruled that the ownder couldn't speak becasue they had a proxy there. Talk about having your cake and eating it – it's that old strata custom of making it up as you go along (and then walking out of the meeting when you're challenged).
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.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.