Repeat meeting convened too soon: board changes not registered
Editorial summary
The association challenged refusal to register board and representation changes. The court upheld refusal because the full notice period for the repeat meeting was not observed, a defect not cured by a possible quorum or later documents.
Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 58 korteriühistu · 80158494
Participants and roles
- Applicant and appellant — Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 58 korteriühistu
The dispute and the court’s decision
Korteriühistu Tallinna mnt 58, now Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 58 korteriühistu, sought registration of a new board and changes to restrictions on representation. After a meeting on 6 June 2013 lacked a quorum, a repeat meeting with the same agenda was scheduled for 13 June.
Tallinna Ringkonnakohus upheld the registrar’s refusal. The articles required at least seven days’ notice and provided no shorter period for a repeat meeting. Time began to run on the day after notification, so the chosen date did not allow the full period. The meeting was not authorised to adopt decisions.
Given that defect, it no longer mattered whether compliant attachments to the minutes were submitted later or sufficient members had attended. The appeal was dismissed and Pärnu Maakohus’s registration order of 20 June 2013 upheld.
Outcome of this decision
Refusal to register the board and representation changes was upheld and the appeal dismissed. Later documents and a possible quorum did not cure the defective notice period for the repeat meeting.