Cancellation of the general meeting st. "revolution" in the SNT or how to recognize the decision of an extraordinary meeting as null and void. In the name of the Russian Federation

IN Pushkinsky District Court of St. Petersburg

Plaintiff: Bokhan Olga Aleksandrovna Address: St. Petersburg, Pushkin, Rekhkolovo garden, st. Srednyaya, house 2 m.t. 8-911-036-96-66

Defendant: Horticultural non-profit partnership "Rekhkolovo", Address: St. Petersburg, Pushkin, Rekhkolovo garden, st. Yuzhnaya, house 34, office 1, m.t. 8-921-429-60-80

STATEMENT OF CLAIM
on declaring the minutes of the SNT meeting invalid

On April 16, 2016, at SNT “Rekhkolovo,” of which I am a member, a general meeting of the members of the partnership was held, the progress and decisions of which were recorded in Minutes No. 1/OS dated April 16, 2016.

I believe that the meeting was unauthorized and its minutes are invalid for the following reasons:

In accordance with Article 20, paragraph 1 of Federal Law-66 of April 15, 1998, “the general meeting of members of a horticultural, gardening or dacha non-profit association is supreme body management of such an association."

In accordance with Article 21 of Federal Law-66 of April 15, 1998 “General meeting of members of a horticultural, gardening or dacha non-profit association (meeting of authorized persons) legally if present at said meeting more than fifty percent of the members of such an association(not less than fifty percent of the authorized representatives).”

According to Article 181.2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation solution meetings is considered accepted, if the majority of meeting participants voted for him and at least fifty percent of the total number of participants participated in the meeting relevant civil law community.

I, being at that time a member of the board, organizing this general meeting in room 106 of St. Petersburg State Agrarian University, can state the following facts:

On April 1, 2016, the board of SNT “Rekhkolovo” (Prot. No. 7/ZP) adopted the following agenda for the general meeting:

1. Report of the Chairman of the Board of SNT “Rekhkolovo”;

2. Reports of the auditor and the audit commission on the financial and economic activities of SNT “Rekhkolovo”;

3. Election of a new board of directors of SNT “Rekhkolovo”;

4. Election of a chairman from the board of SNT “Rekhkolovo”;

5. Approval of membership fees for 2016.

On April 16, 2016, before the general meeting, I led registration list of participants (members) of the general meeting, registered those present.

before the opening of the meeting, and also to count those present at the general meeting of members of SNT "Rekhkolovo" members of SNT consisting of: Shevchenko P.V., Lade O.I., Pinina A.B. and Konyukhova A.M., counted participants (members) present before the opening of the meeting. Number of participants (members), taking into account the 50 (fifty) powers of attorney I have from the members of SNT "Rekhkolovo", certified by the chairman of the board, Yu.A. Usachev, there were 232 participants (members). In total, SNT “Rekhkolovo” has 343 members, therefore, the quorum for making any decisions at the general meeting must be at least 172 participants (members).

Due to the fact that the candidate for chairman of the board V.A. Goryainov, discouraged by the number of powers of attorney issued to me by other members of SNT, came out and informed the present participants (members) that the powers of attorney issued to me were illegal, forged and, according to the information available to him , issued due to restrictions by Usachev Yu.A. members of SNT "Rekhkolovo" in electric power, so that such people, after issuing a power of attorney, have their electric power restored by me, Yu.A. Usachev. and other participants (members) of the meeting, having considered the statement of V.A. Goryainov - public insult and justification is impossible at the moment, the decision was made to leave him.

I decided to inform my principals about this fact so that they could attend the next general meeting in person and independently vote on the agenda items of the general meeting approved by the board on April 1, 2016.

When leaving the audience, I did not declare that my votes (as well as the votes of my clients) would be counted, as was subsequently indicated in Protocol No. 1/OS dated April 16, 2016 - "abstained".

Also, together with me, before the opening of the general meeting of SNT “Rekhkolovo”, 21 participants (members) of SNT “Rekhkolovo” left the audience, which can be confirmed by their testimony at the court hearing. Thus, audience 106 left before the opening of the general meeting 73 participants (members), which is also confirmed by the chairman of the meeting O.V. Kharchenko. and the secretary of the meeting V.V. Glushenko, who reflected this fact in Minutes No. 1/OS dated April 16, 2016 and signed it.

Consequently, the remaining members took responsibility for voting on all issues on the meeting agenda. 159 participants (members), which does not correspond to the quorum of the general meeting, the Charter of SNT “Rekhkolovo”, Federal Law 66 and Art. 181.5 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The quorum of the general meeting of SNT "Rekhkolovo", according to the number of its members, must be at least 172 participants (members) those present at such a meeting.

I believe that the general meeting of SNT “Rekhkolovo” was opened by the remaining participants (members) with the election of the chairman of the meeting and the secretary of the meeting in violation Federal Law 66 of April 15, 1998 and the Charter of SNT “Rekhkolovo”.

My vote, as well as the voices of the members of SNT “Rekhkolovo” (according to powers of attorney issued to me), as well as the voices of those who left before making any decisions - did not participate in decision making on the agenda of the general meeting. The chairman of the meeting and the secretary of the meeting in my presence, as well as in the presence of departed participants (members) were not elected.

According to Article 181.5 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation the decision of the meeting is void if it adopted on an issue not included in the agenda, except if all participants of the relevant civil law community took part in the meeting; adopted in the absence of the required quorum; adopted on an issue not within the competence of the meeting; contrary to the principles of law and order or morality.

In addition, according to Article 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the decision of the meeting may be declared invalid by the court in case of violation of the requirements of the law, including in the case of if there is a significant violation of the procedure for convening, preparing and holding a meeting that affects the will of the meeting participants; the person speaking on behalf of the meeting participant did not have authority; there was a violation of the equality of rights of meeting participants during its holding; there was a significant violation of the rules for drawing up a protocol, including the rules on the written form of the protocol (clause 3 of Article 181.2).

Contested protocol misrepresents my opinion, as well as incorrectly reflecting the will other participants (members), who gave me powers of attorney.

Decisions of the general meeting I, as not taking part in the meeting, has the right to challenge it in court.

According to the Charter of SNT "Rekhkolovo", approved on April 14, 2001, notification of members of the partnership about the holding of a general meeting can be carried out in writing (letters, postcards) through messages in the media, by posting messages on information stands, by telephone, in personal meetings no later than two weeks before the date of its holding. The general meeting is competent if it contains more than fifty percent members of the partnership (clauses 12.8 - 12.11, 12.14, 12.15 of the Charter).

At the same time, the election of the chairman of the board of SNT was attributed to the exclusive competence of the general meeting(Clause 11.2.4 of the Charter) if there is a quorum of voters.

As follows from Minutes No. 1/OS dated April 16, 2016, in addition to the lack of quorum, the agenda of the meeting was changed, which is not allowed Federal Law 66 of April 15, 1998 and the Charter of SNT “Rekhkolovo”, and the question of electing a new board and chairman of the board V.A. Goryainov. was decided at the time when Goryainov’s wife V.A. was the current auditor of SNT "Rekhkolovo".

On April 27, 2016, the Federal Tax Service of Russia No. 15 for St. Petersburg introduced changes to information about an individual who has the right to act without a power of attorney on behalf of the partnership. Information about V.A. Goryainov introduced as chairman of the board of SNT.

Assessing the legality of the general meeting of SNT members held on April 16, 2016 and its decision, I ask the court to come to a conclusion about the validity of my claim.

By virtue of Article 181.3 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if information about the decision of the meeting is entered into the register, information about the judicial act by which the decision of the meeting was declared invalid must also be entered in the corresponding register.

Due to the fact that the requirement to cancel an entry in the Unified State Register of Legal Entities to make changes is not an independent claim that must be resolved. At the same time, the court decision is the basis for entering into the Unified State Register of Legal Entities information on recognizing the decision of the general meeting of members of SNT “Rekhkolovo” dated April 16, 2016 as invalid.

Based on the above, in accordance with Article 19, paragraph 1, paragraph 8 No. 66-FZ of April 15, 1998.
ASK:

1. Recognize protocol No. 1/OS dated April 16, 2016 as completely invalid. general meeting of members of SNT "Rekhkolovo".

Application:
1.statement of claim (with copies of documents);
2.copy of the gardener’s membership card;
3.copy of minutes No. 1/OS dated April 16, 2016 of the general meeting of members of SNT “Rekhkolovo”;
4. State duty receipt.

________________/Bokhan O.A.)

The title of the statement of claim may contain other wording:
"on declaring the protocol... invalid",
"on recognizing the decision of the general meeting... partially invalid."
The title will continue to be general, but the examples of the text of the statements of claim will be different.

October 2010 took place general meeting of members of SNT "Pishchevik", a member and chairman of the board of which I am, the progress and decisions of which are reflected in minutes No. 1. I believe that the meeting was illegal, the decisions made and the minutes are invalid for the following reasons:

The second sentence of the introductory part of the claim is matched to the title of the claim. Those. it is quite possible to write like this: “... I believe that the decision made on items 1, 4, 5 - 8 of the agenda are illegal...” Then, accordingly: “... the meeting was partially invalid...”

The general meeting was held in violation of the provisions of the Law “On gardening, gardening and dacha non-profit associations of citizens” No. 66-FZ of April 15, 1998, Art. 21, clause 2, paragraph 7, which states that -

"...The general meeting of members of a horticultural, gardening or dacha non-profit association (meeting of authorized representatives) is valid if more than fifty percent of the members of such an association (at least fifty percent of authorized representatives) are present at the said meeting. A member of such an association has the right to participate in voting in person or through his representative, whose powers must be formalized by a power of attorney certified by the chairman of such association..."

There was no quorum at the meeting on October 4, 2010. From minutes of the general meeting it is clear that there are 234 members of SNT in the partnership. For the validity of the meeting, the presence at the meeting of 118 SNT members or more is necessary. 133 people attended the meeting. However, of these persons, 24 owners of plots (list full name, plot numbers) are not members of SNT. As of the date of the meeting on October 4, 2010, there are no decisions of the general meeting of the partnership regarding the admission of these persons as members of the SNT, and there are also no minutes of such meetings.

6 people (list the full names of the representatives, the numbers of the plots, the full names of the SNT members whom they represented) who voted for the decision are not the owners of the plots in SNT and were required to take part in voting on agenda items by proxy. The indicated persons did not have such powers of attorney at the meeting; there are no corresponding records of their presence in the registration list of SNT members present at the meeting. There are also no corresponding records on the issuance of powers of attorney for the right to vote and in the journal of registration of outgoing documents of SNT.

In addition, 7 members of the SNT (list full name, precinct numbers) were absent from the meeting on October 4. The signatures of these SNT members on the registration list are forged.

Thus, at the general meeting held on October 4, 2010, only 96 SNT members were present, which is only 41% of all SNT members, which confirms the incompetence and illegality of the meeting, and the decisions taken at it are void. Hence minutes of the general meeting dated October 4, 2010 is invalid, and, accordingly, the records of changes in the Unified State Register legal entities and in the Interdistrict Inspectorate of the Federal Tax Service of the Russian Federation for the largest taxpayers in the Kaliningrad region in information about legal entity SNT "Pishchevik" entered on the basis of this protocol are invalid.

According to the provisions of Article 20, paragraph 1 of Federal Law-66 of April 15, 1998, “the general meeting of members of a horticultural, gardening or dacha non-profit association is the highest governing body of such an association.” I am a member of SNT "Pishchevik" and have the right to participate in the general meeting of members of the Partnership. Through my participation in the work of the meeting, I manage the activities of SNT and make important decisions.
If the procedures and regulations for holding the meeting established by law were not observed, my right to participate in the life of the partnership and the similar right of other members of the SNT on October 4, 2010 was significantly violated.

Based on the above and in accordance with articles: 19, paragraph 1, paragraph 8; 21, clause 2, paragraph 7 Federal Law No. 66-FZ dated April 15, 1998, -

1. Restore the situation that existed before the violation of the law, invalidating the general meeting of SNT members held on October 4, 2010 and the decisions taken at it as void.

2. Invalidate the registration of changes made on the basis of the minutes of the general meeting No. 1 dated October 4, 2010 in the Interdistrict Inspectorate of the Federal Tax Service of Russia for the largest taxpayers in the Kaliningrad region, changes in information about the legal entity SNT "Pishchevik" dated February 3, 2011 in the Unified State Register of Legal Entities on name R.V.A.

3. In accordance with Art. Art. 98, 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation to recover from SNT "Pishchevik" legal costs in the amount of ____ rubles in my favor.

Applications:

2. A copy of the statement of claim.

3. A copy of the certificate of registration with the interdistrict Federal Tax Service of Russia for the largest taxpayers in the Kaliningrad region.

4. A copy of the certificate of registration in the Unified State Register of Legal Entities of the Russian Federation for the Kaliningrad region.

5. A copy of the SNT member’s membership book.

6. A copy of the receipt for payment of the state duty.

7. In preparation for the court hearing, I ask you to oblige the defendant - SNT "Pishchevik" to provide the following documents:

o Charter of SNT "Pishchevik" (as amended in force at the time of the meeting);

8. Call witnesses:

o Full name, address, phone number;

o Full name, address, telephone...

WITH statement of claim in court a copy of it must be submitted with copies of all documents attached to the claim, in accordance with the number of defendants and third parties. This is necessary so that the court, having accepted the application for its proceedings, sends copies of the statement of claim to all participants in the case. If these requirements are not met, the court issues a ruling to leave the application without consideration and gives the plaintiff a period to eliminate the shortcomings. If the deficiencies are not eliminated within the prescribed period, the application is considered not submitted and is returned to the plaintiff. In certain cases established by law, the application is returned without giving the plaintiff the opportunity to eliminate the deficiencies.

"____" ___________ 201___

Example 2:

On October 4, 2010, a general meeting of members of SNT “Pishchevik” took place, of which I am a member,

Chairman of the Board of SNT "Pishchevik" I.I. Ivanov

"____" ___________ 201___

Related information.

Case No. 2-159/17

SOLUTION

IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Moscow region

Sergiev Posad City Court of the Moscow Region, composed of: presiding judge Pchelintseva, with secretary Yu.S. Kuznetsova, having considered in open court a civil case based on the claim of K.B. Protasov. to SNT "Zodiac" on recognizing the decision of the general meeting dated DD.MM.YYYY as invalid,

INSTALLED:

Protasov K.B. taking into account repeated clarifications (case files 4-6, 167-169, 191-193), he filed a lawsuit against SNT “Zodiac” to declare the decision of the general meeting dated DD.MM.YYYY invalid, indicating in support of the claim that he is member of SNT "Zodiac", was present at the general meeting of SNT, held on DD.MM.YYYY and participated in the voting. Considers the decisions adopted at the said general meeting to be invalid, since the meeting was held in violation of the requirements of the law: there was no quorum, the counting of votes of those present at the meeting was carried out in violation, since the votes were counted by the number of plots owned by those present at the meeting, and not by the number votes of SNT members, while some of those present at the meeting were not members of SNT, and therefore their votes should not have been taken into account when counting. At the meeting, in violation of the SNT Charter, the board and chairman of the board were elected by open voting, whereas according to the Charter they should be elected by secret ballot. Asks the court to recognize the decisions of the general meeting of members of SNT “Zodiac” dated DD.MM.YYYY. invalid (case file 167).

At the court session Protasov K.B. didn't show up. Representative of Protasov K.B. by proxy of E.P. Protasov the stated demands were supported on the grounds set out in the claim and clarifications to it.

The representative of the defendant SNT "Zodiac" is the chairman of the board Pripadchev S.E. did not recognize the claims on the grounds of a written response (case sheets 156-158) taking into account the addition (case sheet 211). He explained that the quorum at the SNT meeting was DD.MM.YYYY. 95 SNT members out of 188 were present at the meeting, and votes were counted without violations. The elections of members of the board and the chairman were indeed held by open voting, since this method of election complies with the norms of current legislation and does not lead to a violation of anyone’s rights. Currently, changes are being prepared to the SNT Charter, which have not been adopted for objective reasons. At the same time, the plaintiff, while participating in the vote, did not claim a violation of the election procedure, as evidenced by the ballot paper signed by him. Claim by Protasov K.B. initiated solely in connection with his evasion of his direct responsibilities to pay membership and target fees. He asked the plaintiff to refuse to satisfy the stated demands, including on the grounds that the plaintiff Protasov K.B. is not a member of SNT "Zodiac". Explained that the plaintiff purchased in the year DD.MM.YYYY land plot No. from Svidlo Yu.V., since then the plaintiff has been using the site, but was not accepted as a member of the SNT at the general meeting, as required by law, and therefore he does not have the right to challenge the decisions of the general meeting.

Representative of the plaintiff Protasov E.P. did not dispute that the plaintiff was not accepted as a member of SNT at the general meeting, but the plaintiff has been paying fees since 2001, participating in general meetings, and SNT “Zodiac” has been subject to demands for the collection of contributions as a member of SNT. These requirements were satisfied by the court. In this connection, he considers the grounds stated by the representative of the defendant to be inconsistent with the actual situation.

After listening to the explanations of the representatives of the plaintiff and defendant, witnesses, and having studied the written evidence presented in the case, the court comes to the following conclusion.

In accordance with Art. 181.4 the decision of the meeting may be declared invalid by the court if the requirements of the law are violated, including if:

1) there has been a significant violation of the procedure for convening, preparing and holding a meeting, affecting the expression of will of the meeting participants;

2) the person speaking on behalf of the meeting participant did not have authority;

3) there was a violation of the equality of rights of participants in the meeting during its holding;

4) there has been a significant violation of the rules for drawing up a protocol, including the rules on the written form of the protocol (clause 3 of Article 181.2).

2. A decision of a meeting cannot be declared invalid by a court on grounds related to a violation of the procedure for making a decision, if it is confirmed by a decision of a subsequent meeting adopted in the prescribed manner before the court’s decision.

3. The decision of the meeting has the right to be challenged in court by a participant in the relevant civil law community who did not take part in the meeting or voted against the adoption of the contested decision.

4. The decision of the meeting cannot be declared invalid by the court if the vote of the person whose rights are affected by the contested decision could not influence its adoption and the decision of the meeting does not entail significant adverse consequences for this person.

5. The decision of the meeting may be challenged in court within six months from the day when the person whose rights were violated by the adoption of the decision learned or should have known about it, but no later than two years from the day when information about the decision became available publicly available to participants of the relevant civil law community.

6. A person challenging a decision of a meeting must notify in writing in advance the participants of the relevant civil law community of his intention to file such a claim in court and provide them with other information relevant to the case. Participants of the relevant civil law community who have not joined such a claim in the manner established by procedural legislation, including those who have other grounds for challenging this decision, subsequently do not have the right to apply to the court with demands to challenge this decision, unless the court recognizes the reasons for this appeal are valid.

7. A contestable decision of a meeting, declared invalid by a court, is invalid from the moment of its adoption.

The court found that Protasov K.B. is the owner of land plots No. located at:

07/11/2015 A general meeting of members of SNT “Zodiac” was held, documented by protocol dated DD.MM.YYYY. (case sheet 13-15).

The file includes the Charter of SNT "Zodiac" (case sheets 19-26), an extract from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, from which it follows that the chairman of the board is S.E. Pripadchev. (case sheet 31-34).

The registration sheet of those present at the meeting DD.MM.YYYY (case sheets 46-49) is presented in the case, from which it follows that the plaintiff Protasov K.B. attended the meeting DD.MM.YYYY

From the voting ballots submitted to the court (case sheets 50-153), it is clear that Protasov K.B. participated in voting on decision-making, which is confirmed by the ballot paper signed by him (case file 149).

The defendant's representative Pripadchev S.E. it was stated that the plaintiff missed the limitation period provided for in Part 5 of Article 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (case file 215), in connection with which Pripadchev S.E. asks to apply the consequences of the plaintiff missing the statute of limitations to apply to the court to challenge the decision of the general meeting dated DD.MM.YYYY. and deny the plaintiff's claim.

The limitation period is the period for protecting the right under the claim of a person whose right has been violated.

According to paragraph 5 of Art. 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the decision of the meeting can be challenged in court within six months from the day when the person whose rights were violated by the adoption of the decision learned or should have known about it, but no later than within two years from the day when information about the decision taken became publicly available to participants in the relevant civil law community.

The court found that with the claim to the court the plaintiff Protasov K.B. appealed DD.MM.YYYY., in connection with which the court considers that the plaintiff missed the six-month deadline to go to court to challenge the decisions of the general meeting from DD.MM.YYYY

Arguments of the representative of the plaintiff Protasova E.P. that the plaintiff did not miss the statute of limitations, since the plaintiff saw the minutes of the general meeting only in DD.MM.YYYY during the consideration of a civil case in the Meshchansky Court of Moscow, where SNT "Zodiac" filed a claim to collect debt from the plaintiff on target and membership fees (case sheets 239-242), the court considers insolvent, since Protasov K.B. he himself took part in the meeting DD.MM.YYYY. and he was aware of the decisions taken at the meeting.

As stated in paragraph 15 of the Plenum Resolution Supreme Court Russian Federation dated September 29, 2015 No. 43 “On some issues related to the application of the provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the limitation period”, the expiration of the limitation period is an independent basis for refusing a claim (paragraph two of paragraph 2 of Article 199 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). If it is established that a party to the case has missed the limitation period and there are no valid reasons for reinstating this period for the plaintiff - individual, then if there is a statement from the appropriate person about the expiration of the statute of limitations, the court has the right to refuse to satisfy the claim only for these reasons, without examining other circumstances of the case.

Based on the foregoing, the court believes that the plaintiff missed the statute of limitations for challenging the decision of the general meeting dated DD.MM.YYYY, and therefore the claims should be denied.

Guided by Art. Art. part 5 of article 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, 194-199 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, court

DECIDED:

In the claim of Protasov K.B. to SNT "Zodiac" to recognize the decision of the general meeting dated DD.MM.YYYY as invalid - refuse.

The decision can be appealed to the Moscow Regional Court within a month from the date of its adoption in final form through the Sergiev Posad City Court.

Federal Judge S.N. Pchelintseva

The general meeting of SNT members decides key issues of the garden partnership. Every member of the partnership who has a membership book can come to such a general meeting and take part in voting. If a member of the partnership cannot directly come to the meeting, then he can appoint an attorney and issue him a notarized power of attorney for the meeting.

The general meeting of members of the union is held according to the rules established by law, so in particular, in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in 2013, a rule was introduced establishing the procedure for holding any types of general meetings, the goals of which will be to establish the rights and obligations for a certain circle of individuals or organizations.

The general meeting must be held with prior notice to the members of the gardening partnership, for example, at information stands next to the board building.

It should be taken into account that the rule (procedure) for informing about the holding of a general meeting must be enshrined in the charter or decided at one of the first general meetings of the partnership. If, for example, such a procedure is not spelled out in the charter and is not determined by the decision of the general meeting, then, obviously, the gardener is obliged to notify the gardener about the meeting by any available means: against signature, by telephone message, SMS message, etc.

Invalidity, insignificance of the meeting of gardeners

If a gardening member was not properly notified of a meeting, then this is a reason to invalidate the decision of such a meeting in court. The invalidity of such a meeting can be recognized only if it, firstly, entailed a violation of the rights of the gardener and, secondly, if the participation of the gardener in it could influence the outcome of the meeting.

Residential building in SNT

A mandatory condition is the inclusion of the agenda of the general meeting in the notice. If any of the issues submitted for discussion at the meeting are not on the agenda, the decision on it is void.

In general, gross failure to comply with the procedure for informing and holding a gardening meeting as provided for in the charter may result in the court declaring the invalidity of such a general meeting. For example, the issue of expelling I.I. Ivanov from the membership of the gardening partnership was brought up for decision at the general meeting of the SNT. At this meeting, according to the registration list, there was 55%, that is, there was a quorum, but during the court hearing it was established that 10% of the signatures on the registration list were fake. Consequently, such a decision of the SNT meeting will be void and will not have legal consequences for anyone.

By the way!!!

Introduced into the Civil Code of the Russian Federation since 2013 legal norm, due to which the minutes of the meeting of the SNT (including gardeners) must indicate the composition of the participants. Accordingly, the absence of registration lists, as an appendix to the protocol, may be regarded by the court as a violation mandatory requirements to hold a general meeting and declare it invalid.

Authorized SNT

Particular attention should be paid and kept in mind that some SNTs with large numbers use a scheme for holding a meeting of authorized representatives.

Who is the authorized person? An authorized person is a member of the gardening community who is selected from several gardeners and has the right to one vote at the general meeting. At the same time, gardeners who have elected such an authorized person do not have the right to vote at the general meeting. Unfortunately, the scheme for holding a meeting of authorized representatives, which was initially aimed at good purposes, namely obtaining a quorum, is often used for fraud. So, for example, a dishonest new chairman of the council and the board, taking advantage of the lack of knowledge of gardeners, can campaign for the candidacies of their representatives, through whom they will then push through the decisions they need.

Gardeners should note that non-participation in general meetings, as well as a frivolous attitude towards the selection of an authorized representative, may have some negative legal consequences. So, in particular, at the general meeting a decision may be made to significantly increase membership fees to an unaffordable amount, to carry out unnecessary construction work or to purchase unnecessary inventory and equipment at the expense of targeted contributions from SNT members. The gardener will find out about all this only by requesting the minutes of the general meeting of the SNT.

Date of publication: 07/01/2015

Members of a gardening, gardening or dacha non-profit association have the right to appeal to the court a decision of the general meeting of its members (meeting of authorized representatives), which violates the rights and legitimate interests of a member of such an association (paragraph 12, paragraph 2, article 21 of the Law of April 15, 1998 N 66-FZ ).
In this case, a member of the SNT who did not take part in the meeting or voted against the adoption of the contested decision has the right, in any case, if there are grounds provided for by law, to appeal the decision of the general meeting of SNT members.
A member of the SNT who voted for the decision or abstained from voting has the right to challenge the decision of the meeting in court in cases where his expression of will during voting was violated (clause 3 of Article 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

Note!
The decision of the meeting cannot be declared invalid by the court if the vote of the person whose rights are affected by the contested decision could not influence its adoption and the decision of the meeting does not entail significant adverse consequences for this person (Clause 4 of Article 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

Grounds for declaring the general meeting of SNT invalid

The decision of the general meeting of SNT members is invalid due to its recognition as such by the court (disputable decision) or regardless of such recognition (void decision) (clause 1 of Article 181.3 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).
The decision of the general meeting of SNT members is void if it (Article 181.5 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation):
- adopted on an issue not included in the agenda, except for the case when all members of the SNT took part in the meeting;
- adopted in the absence of the required quorum.

Note. The general meeting of SNT members is valid if more than 50 percent of the members of such an association are present at the said meeting (paragraph 7, paragraph 2, article 21 of Law No. 66-FZ);

Adopted on an issue not within the competence of the meeting.

Note. The competence of the general meeting of SNT members is provided for by the company's charter (paragraph 10, paragraph 4, article 16 of Law No. 66-FZ);

Contradicts the principles of law and order or morality.
The decision of the general meeting of SNT members is contestable and can be declared invalid by the court if (clause 1 of Article 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation):
- there was a significant violation of the procedure for convening, preparing and holding a meeting, affecting the expression of will of the meeting participants;
- the person speaking on behalf of the meeting participant did not have authority;
- there was a violation of the equality of rights of meeting participants during its holding;
- there was a significant violation of the rules for drawing up a protocol, including the rules on the written form of the protocol (clause 3 of Article 181.2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

The procedure for invalidating the general meeting of SNT

The decision of the meeting can be challenged in court within six months from the day when the person whose rights were violated by the decision learned or should have known about it, but no later than within two years from the day when information about the decision became publicly available to SNT participants (clause 5 of article 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).
In order to invalidate the decision of the general meeting of SNT members, we recommend adhering to the following algorithm.

Step 1. Obtain the minutes of the general meeting of SNT members, the decision of which you plan to challenge.

The minutes of the general meeting of SNT members are signed by the chairman and secretary of such a meeting, certified by the SNT seal and kept in its files permanently.
A copy of the minutes of the general meeting of SNT members is presented for review to members of such an association upon their request (clauses 1, 3 of Article 27 of Law No. 66-FZ).

Step 2. Notify other SNT members of your intention to file a lawsuit to challenge the decision of the general meeting of SNT members.

Notification must be made in writing and in advance. In addition, members of the SNT must be provided with other information relevant to the case (clause 6 of Article 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

Note. Members of the SNT who have not joined such a claim, including those who have other grounds for challenging this decision, subsequently do not have the right to apply to the court with demands to challenge the decision, unless the court recognizes the reasons for this application as valid (clause 6 of Article 181.4 of the Civil Code RF).

Step 3. Prepare and submit to the court a statement of claim to invalidate the decision of the general meeting of SNT and the documents attached to it.

The statement of claim must indicate the name of the defendant - SNT and its location, what the violation or threat of violation of the rights of a SNT member is in connection with the adoption of the contested decision, the plaintiff's claims, as well as the circumstances and evidence on which they are based.
Pay a state fee of 300 rubles. (Clause 3, Clause 1, Article 333.19 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).
The following documents must be attached to the statement of claim (Article 132 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation):
- a copy of the statement of claim in accordance with the number of defendants and third parties;
- a document confirming payment of the state duty;
- power of attorney or other document certifying the authority of the plaintiff’s representative;
- documents confirming the circumstances on which you base your claims, copies of these documents for defendants and third parties, if they do not have copies;
- a certified copy of the contested decision of the general meeting of SNT members.
The claim is brought at the location of the SNT (Article 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

Note!
To resolve a legal dispute, you may need qualified legal assistance, the cost of which, depending on the complexity of the case, the amount of the claim and other factors, may be significant. If your interests are represented in court, you will need to prepare a notarized power of attorney for the representative (Article 185, 185.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation; Part 2 of Article 53 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

Step 4. Take part in the court hearing and receive a court decision that has entered into legal force.

The court decision comes into force upon the expiration of the period for appeal, if it has not been appealed. The deadline for filing an appeal is one month from the date the court decision was made in final form (Part 1 of Article 209, Part 2 of Article 321 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

Reference. Determination of the final form of the court decision
The adoption of a court decision in final form involves the preparation of introductory, descriptive, motivational and operative parts of the decision (Part 1 of Article 198 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).
The operative part of the decision is announced by the court at the same court session in which the trial of the case ended (Part 1 of Article 199 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).
Drawing up a reasoned court decision may be postponed for a period of no more than five days from the date of completion of the case. In this case, the reasoning part of the court decision must indicate: the circumstances of the case established by the court; evidence on which the court's conclusions about these circumstances are based; reasons why the court rejects certain evidence; the laws that guided the court (part 4 of article 198, part 2 of article 199 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

If an appeal is filed, the decision comes into force after the court considers the appeal, unless the appealed decision has been cancelled. If the decision of the court of first instance was canceled or changed and a new decision was made, it comes into force immediately (Part 1 of Article 209 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).