Resolutions passed during the coronavirus pandemic at a so-called representatives' meeting remain valid. This was recently decided by the Federal Court of Justice (AZ: V ZR 80\/23). The decision is based on the fact that the resolutions are not invalid solely because some of the owners were only represented by proxies.<\/p>\n
In this case, it was not possible to hold an owners' meeting in person due to the regulations during the coronavirus pandemic. The administrator had therefore invited the owners to a written owners' meeting and asked the condominium owners to grant powers of attorney for voting. Some of the owners did so. The administrator then held an owners' meeting on her own and sent the owners minutes with the resolutions passed. Owners who had not issued a power of attorney filed a complaint against this. However, they did not comply with the one-month deadline for filing an action. The Frankfurt district court therefore dismissed the action.<\/p>\n
The resolutions of the district court were later declared null and void by the regional court. The reason for this was that the district court considered the owners' right to attend an owners' meeting in person to have been violated. However, the BGH overturned the ruling and restored the local court's decision. The judges emphasized the difficult situation of the administrator, who had to choose between complying with condominium law and infection protection law. The decision takes account of the exceptional circumstances and enables condominiums to remain capable of acting even in times of crisis.<\/p>\n
Source and further information: bundesgerichtshof.de\/wohnen-im-eigentum.de
\n \u00a9 immonewsfeed<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Beschl\u00fcsse, die w\u00e4hrend der Corona-Pandemie in einer sogenannten Vertreterversammlung gefasst wurden, behalten ihre G\u00fcltigkeit. Das hat der Bundesgerichtshof k\u00fcrzlich entschieden (AZ: V ZR 80\/23). Die Entscheidung st\u00fctzt sich darauf, dass die Beschl\u00fcsse nicht allein deshalb nichtig sind, weil einige der Eigent\u00fcmer nur durch Vollmachten vertreten waren. Im vorliegenden Fall war eine Eigent\u00fcmerversammlung in Pr\u00e4senz aufgrund […]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":8325,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[34],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8323","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-guter-rat"],"yoast_head":"\n