In a condominium owners' meeting (WEG), a vote was held on structural changes to the common property. One of the unit owners asked for approval for the conversion of a shopping center, which would change parts of the common property. The same WEG meeting also dealt with the levying of a special apportionment for modernization measures relating to the fire protection of the common property.
Both requests were approved by a simple majority vote. The resolutions were announced by the manager of the property manager at an owners' meeting. Thereupon, one of the owners who voted against the project contests the resolution. In his opinion, the resolution should not have been announced at the owners' meeting because not all owners had agreed to the structural measures, which would be impaired by the conversion measures to a certain extent pursuant to Section 14 No. 1 WEG. The action of the owner remained unsuccessful after a court decision (AZ V ZR 141/19). According to the Federal Supreme Court (BGH), a resolution passed by majority vote may be announced even if not all of the affected condominium owners have agreed to the construction measures.
The costs incurred as a result of the action for avoidance were imposed on the condominium owners. They in turn demand reimbursement of the legal costs from the administrator. According to the ruling of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH), there is no entitlement to compensation for the legal costs, as the chairman of the meeting did not act in breach of duty. However, the chairperson must comply with his or her duties to inform and advise. Thus, he must inform the owners whether and, if so, which owners will be affected by the structural changes and point out the risk of rescission. If he fails to do so, he is in breach of his duties. In the case at hand, the owners were unable to prove that the chairman of the meeting had not complied with these duties.
Source: BGH
© fotolia.com
