Regulations to support the Unit Titles Act 2010 - summary of submissions
Section 7 – Body corporate committees
Delegation of body corporate duties or powers to a committee
(P41-P44 in the discussion document)
P 41: The written notice advising of delegation includes:
- the delegated function(s)
- how long it is in effect for
- whether there are any financial or other constraints on the committee in undertaking the delegation
- a statement to the effect that the notice is evidence of the committee’s authority to act
- how often the committee is required to report to the body corporate on the matter(s) delegated.
P 42: The written notice revoking delegation includes the revoked function and the date the revocation is effective.
P 43: Only the body corporate has the authority to serve the above notices.
P 44: The above notices are served on the chairperson of the body corporate committee.
Questions
(Q45-Q48 in the discussion document)
Submitters were asked whether some, all or none of the proposals should be regulated; whether anything should be added to the list; what the advantages and disadvantages were for them and whether the proposals would affect them financially.
Summary of responses
A significant number of submitters who responded to this section thought the proposals about delegation of body corporate duties should be regulated.
Of the 73 submissions:
- 8 submitters said none of the proposals should be regulated
- 8 said some of the proposals should be regulated
- 21 said all the proposals should be regulated
- 30 did not comment on these questions
- 6 made suggestions or raised other issues.
Submitters raised several salient points.
- Several submitters thought there should be more clarification over the duties between the body corporate chair and the body corporate committee chair – including whether they should be the same person.
- Many submitters thought regulations should clarify whether sub-committees could be established and how delegation should work in that situation.
Election of the committee and the chair of the body corporate committee
(P45-P55 in the discussion document)
P 45: The body corporate will elect members of the committee at each annual general meeting, to hold office until the next annual general meeting.
P 46: Any unit owner may nominate any person to be the on the committee. The nominee must agree to the nomination.
P 47: The body corporate must decide who runs the election process (collecting the nominations, advising vote collecting and counting) by ordinary resolution. This person must not be a nominee, nominator or incumbent.
P 48: The body corporate must decide whether the voting is by secret or open ballot by ordinary resolution.
P 49: The body corporate may, by resolution at an extraordinary general meeting, remove any committee member before the expiration of their term of office and appoint another member in their place to hold office until the next annual general meeting.
P 50: There must be a minimum of three and maximum of nine members on the committee.
P 51: Only unit owners or a person engaged by the body corporate to undertake the role (for example, a professional body corporate manager) can be a committee member.
P 52: A committee member or nominee must declare any conflict of interest before the election or when the conflict arises.
P 53: When a vacancy arises on a committee, the body corporate must, within four weeks, call a general meeting to nominate and elect a new member.
P 54: The committee members elect the chairperson at the first committee meeting.
P 55: Only a committee member or a person engaged by the body corporate to undertake the role (for example, a professional body corporate manager) can be chairperson.
Questions
(Q49-Q52 in the discussion document)
Submitters were asked whether some, all or none of the proposals should be regulated; whether anything should be added to the list; what the advantages and disadvantages were for them and whether the proposals would affect them financially.
Summary of responses
A majority of submitters who responded to this section thought all or at least some proposals about body corporate committees should be regulated.
Of 73 submissions:
- 2 submitters said none of the proposals should be regulated
- 14 said some of the proposals should be regulated
- 18 said all the proposals should be regulated
- 32 did not comment on these questions
- 7 made suggestions or raised other issues.
Submitters raised several salient points.
- Many submitters thought regulations should prescribe a process or other solution where a vacancy arises on the committee other than calling a body corporate meeting.
- Several submitters thought only unit owners should be able to be on the committee
- Some submitters wanted further clarification on who would be eligible to be on the committee.
Body corporate committee meetings
(P53-P56 in the discussion document)
P 53: The committee must first meet within one month of its creation.
P 54: The committee must hold meetings at least quarterly.
P 55: For a postal vote, the voter needs to complete the prescribed form and return it to the named person and place within a specified time for the vote to count.
P 56: The quorum necessary for transaction of committee business must be:
- half if there is an even number of members
- a majority if there is an odd number of members
- in any case a minimum of three.
Questions
(Q53-Q56 in the discussion document)
Submitters were asked whether some, all or none of the proposals should be regulated; whether anything should be added to the list; what the advantages and disadvantages were for them and whether the proposals would affect them financially.
Summary of responses
Submitters were divided over whether body corporate meetings should be regulated.
Of 73 submissions:
- 10 submitters said none of the proposals should be regulated
- 13 said some of the proposals should be regulated
- 15 said all the proposals should be regulated
- 32 did not comment on these questions
- 3 made suggestions or raised other issues.
Submitters raised several salient points.
- A majority of submitters thought there should be more flexibility in rescheduling meetings – especially in terms of meeting place.
- Many submitters thought there should be more flexibility in the frequency of committee meetings and that perhaps this could be left to the committee.