Sign up for exclusives

In many of the adjudicator’s orders that we have reviewed outcomes from Annual General Meetings, Committee Meetings or VOCM’s have been overturned on the basis that the decisions made were unreasonable and these orders have generally been sought by Lot Owners.

Now while a Body Corporate and it’s Committee have an obligation to act reasonably, this onus also falls to Lot Owners who vote on motions proposed at Annual General Meetings and they must also ensure that if they are voting against a motion, their reasons are appropriate to the motion concerned.

An example of this is an application that was submitted by a Body Corporate to the Commissioners Office seeking a ruling that a Resolution without Dissent Motion that was defeated at an EGM held in June be deemed as passed. The Body Corporate has claimed that the reason that the motion was defeated was the vote of a lot owner was unreasonable.

The motion being proposed was for a reallocation of exclusive use parking spaces for 2 lots as upgrades to Common Property affected their existing parking spaces and while the affected lot owners were in agreement to the reallocation as one lot owner within the scheme voted against the motion, it was defeated.

When asked to make a submission, the lot owner who had voted against the motion provided reasoning which did not appear to relate to the motion, but rather were complaints in relation to the committee and other renovations / projects that were being carried out. It was clear to the Adjudicator that the owner had made no submission that he objected to the surrender of the existing car parking spaces, the granting of the reallocated car park space or that the change would adversely impact on their rights to the use and enjoyment of their lot or the scheme common property.

Accordingly, the Adjudicator ruled that the opposition of the motion was unreasonable in the circumstances and deemed the motion to have been passed and as such require the Body Corporate to records a new CMS to give effect to the motion and the change in the exclusive use car parking spaces.

The order can be read in full here