Definition : Majority (general meeting of co-owners) - Double Majority

Question: The syndicate's board of directors made the decision to cut down a tree at the entrance of the property. It was a very old apple tree. It was unpleasant for many people to know that we were constantly walking in the debris of cheekbones that fell on the ground, on the sidewalk or in the parking lot. Finally these apples ended up making a fermentation (very unpleasant smell). Now a co-owner is reproaching for not having voted on this decision at the meeting of co-owners. Is he right?

Question: Can a meeting of co-owners take a regular decision despite the abstention of many co-owners present? How should these absentees be dealt with (a vote for or against)?  And what about non-voting on a decision of the members of the board of directors? Answer: Abstaining is a matter of concern in any democracy. Co-ownership is no exception to this reality. This question concerns both directors and co-owners: what about the scope of an abstention during a vote? However, the consequences are different, depending on whether it is the meeting of the co-owners or of the board of directors. In a meeting of co-owners, abstentionist co-owners are counted with the votes against, while for a meeting of the board of directors, non-voting directors are not taken into account (they have not "expressed themselves").  

  Irregularities noted at a meeting of co-owners do not make the decisions taken non-existent, but voidable. Consequently, the co-owner who intends to invoke the irregularity of a decision must initiate a legal proceeding, in accordance with article 1103 of the Civil Code of Quebec. Wishing to promote the stability of the decisions taken by the assembly, the legislature allows such a remedy to be brought only in certain circumstances. Thus, any co-owner may ask the court to annul or, exceptionally, modify a decision of the meeting of co-owners if it is partial, if it was taken with the intention of harming the co-owners or in disregard of their rights, or if an error occurred in the calculation of votes.  

The divided co-ownership of a building is not necessarily intended to last for eternity. The end of the co-ownership, and therefore the dissolution and liquidation of the syndicate, is justifiable, for various reasons. The dissolution of a co-ownership leads to a liquidation process. This process is regulated by articles 1108 and 1109 of the Civil Code of Québec, which refer to the rules applicable to legal persons concerning their liquidation.The question of putting an end to your co-ownership may one day arise. There are therefore various questions to be asked about this approach. What are the reasons for terminating a co-ownership? What are the modalities and consequences of a dissolution? Answers in this fact sheet!

The destination of the immovable, of the private portions and of the common portions is a fundamental concept in co-ownerships. It is both a real regulator of the rights and obligations of co-owners and a reference value between the permit and the prohibited. The destination of the building is determined in the 1st part of the declaration of co-ownership (constituting act of co-ownership). It is it that also makes it possible to establish the type of co-ownership established and defines the use(s) that can be made of the private and common portions. It can thus be exclusively commercial or residential or residential but with the possibility of practicing a professional activity. It can also be mixed, such as, allowing shops on the ground floor and apartments on the upper floors.  

Question: During our last general meeting of co-owners, the president of the board of directors suggested to sell a parcel of land located in the backyard of our immovable. According to him, the amount that we could receive would allow to replenish the contingency fund. Can you tell me if that is possible? If this is the case, I would like to know who has the authority to make this decision.

The work  to be done in the common portions is subject to rules of which it is useful to know all the ins and outs. The syndicate of co-owners acts in this matter through its two bodies, the board of directors and the meeting of the co-owners. It is up to the board of directors to analyze the scope and budget of the work, and to organize, when required by law, a meeting of co-owners (annual meeting or special meeting.) which will aim to vote by majority the final decision. The majorities to be obtained in a vote will not necessarily be the same, depending on the type of work.  

The rules for voting in meeting of co-owners vary depending on the importance of the decision to be made. They require a complex calculations in order to determine whether a the required majority has been reached. To do so, you must make sure that the register of co-owners is up to date, and that the compilation of votes is done according to the relative value specific to each fraction. This reduces the risk of contestation of an adopted resolution. That said, some decisions have extremely important consequences for all co-owners so the requirements in terms of majorities are then higher. For this reason, the law essentially imposes four levels of majority: absolute, enhanced, double.