Ban on new board elections: interim measure set aside

In a board-election dispute, the first-instance court temporarily prohibited new resolutions concerning the board and its members’ powers. The appellate court set the measure aside because the association, as a person concerned, could not request it in these proceedings.

XX challenged the 03.08.2020 repeat-meeting resolutions of Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 32 korteriühistu. The association sought appointment of a substitute board member or a ban on meetings until the dispute ended. Instead of banning all meetings, Viru Maakohus prohibited resolutions concerning the board and members’ authority during proceedings. XX appealed. Tartu Ringkonnakohus held that interim protection in these proceedings could be granted at the applicant’s request. The association was a person concerned and had brought no claim of its own, so it was not entitled to request the measure. Nor did public interest justify intervention to protect it without an applicant’s request. The appellate court set the order aside and itself refused the association’s interim-protection application. It did not determine the substantive validity of board elections. It also noted uncertainty about representatives acting under powers of attorney issued by different boards. The first-instance court must examine that issue and requests concerning participation in the case. Costs will be decided with the main case.

The appeal was granted: the prohibition on resolutions concerning the board and its members’ powers was set aside and the association’s interim-protection request refused. This does not decide the elections’ validity. The first-instance court will determine costs in the final ruling.