Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
The rules state that the President of the Club should take the chair at General Meetings. On this occasion the Chairman of thee club Committee is demanding that he chairs the SGM that is calling into question the way in which the financial and business affairs of the club are conducted. The rules have been followed for the requisitioning of the meeting but whereas the rules state that each member should be given notice in writing only emails have been sent out to about 60% of members and the s/w package used reveals that only about 60% of the messages have been picked up. Notice is displayed in the club but that is beside the point.
The main issue in dispute relates to the letting of the space in the upper floors of the club for offices, mainly to members of the committee, and the lack of transparency with which this is being done. I should aadd that the tenants have been in occupation for over a year now without proper leases having been signed. The proposed lease put forward by the Chairman of the Committee is less than one A4 page which is not considered sufficient by the Trustee who has been asked to sign it off, especially so since he is not happy with the quantum of the rent.
The Chairman threatens to appoint two cronies to vacant positions as trustees who will then sign off the leases. Can anything be done to stop this? If he does go head and do so before the SGM on 21st April is there anything that can then be done about it?
Under the rules, the trustees may be nominated by the committee and thus nominated they shall execute a trust deed. So what they might do is within the rules but can nothing be done to stop them or to inhibit them from doing so?
The breaking of rules refers to the attempt to supplant the President from taking the chair at the SGM and the failure to give proper notice of the meeting to all members.
That clarifies the position admirably. Thank you very much. I presume that there would not be anything that we could do if they were to act before any injunction were in place.