| CITATION : | NRMA LIMITED v SNODGRASS [2001] NSWCA 312 |
| FILE NUMBER(S) : | CA 40113/01 |
| HEARING DATE(S) : | 7 September 2001 |
| JUDGMENT DATE : | 12 September 2001 |
PARTIES : | NRMA LIMITED v WILLIAM SNODGRASS |
| JUDGMENT OF : | Mason P at 1; Meagher JA at 24; Sheller JA at 25 |
| LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : | Supreme Court - Equity Division |
| LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : | SC 4929/00 |
| LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER : | Windeyer J |
| COUNSEL : | Appellant: B R McClintock SC/ R S Hollo Respondent: A Hartnell (Sol) |
| SOLICITORS : | Appellant: Corrs Chambers Westgarth Respondent: Atanaskovic Hartnell |
| CATCHWORDS : | Company Law - members' requisition for general meeting to put resolution to amend Constitution - amendment to require board election campaign funding details to be fully disclosed - whether meeting convened for proper purpose - NRMA v Parker (1986) 6 NSWLR 517 distinguished -whether amendment would constitute oppressive conduct - whether proposed article so vague as to be meaningless - whether amendment retrospective in effect (D) |
| LEGISLATION CITED : | Corporations Law, ss203D, 232-233 |
| CASES CITED: | Browne v Panga Pty Ltd (1995) 14 WAR 393 Gambotto v WCP Ltd (1995) 183 CLR 432 Isle of Wight Railway Co v Tahourdin (1883) 25 ChD 320. NRMA v Parker (1986) 6 NSWLR 517 Totally & Permanently Incapacitated Veterans' Association of NSW Ltd v Gadd (1998) 28 ACSR 549 |
| DECISION : | Appeal dismissed with costs |
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL
CA 40113/2001
SC 4929/2000
MASON P
MEAGHER JA
SHELLER JA
Wednesday 12 September 2001
NRMA LIMITED v William SNODGRASS
JUDGMENT
1 MASON P: The NRMA is widely known as a service organisation and as a body racked by disputation over its structure and governance. The main venues of dispute have been the boardroom, the general meeting and the court. This appeal touches all three venues. It concerns a members’ requisition for a general meeting to put a resolution to amend the Constitution affecting a group of board members. Fittingly, the leading authority cited is National Roads & Motorists’ Association v Parker (1986) 6 NSWLR 517 (Parker).
2 In its current form, the much-amended Constitution of the NRMA provides for a board of 16 with half retiring in 2001 and half in 2003. Leaving aside casual vacancies, half the current board was elected in 1997 and half in 1999. Membership of NRMA is essential for board membership.
3 The requisitionists (represented by the respondent pursuant to Pt 8 r11) have complied with the statutory formalities (see Corporations Law (now Corporations Act), ss249D, 249P) for requesting the calling of a meeting and the distribution of an explanatory statement. The resolution proposed is:
1. That the Constitution of NRMA Limited be amended by inserting a new Rule 161, in the following terms:
“All directors elected to the Board in the 1999 half board election shall publish to members in the [following] report to members, full details of their election campaign funding including details of all donations and advertising, donated advertisements, and…
Continue reading NRMA Limited v Snodgrass
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- NRMA Limited v Snodgrass [2001] NSWCA 312
- Case
- [2001] NSWCA 312
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court was required to determine several key legal issues. These included whether the requisitioned meeting was convened for a proper purpose, distinguishing the present circumstances from those in *NRMA v Parker*. Further, the Court had to consider whether the proposed constitutional amendment would constitute oppressive conduct, whether the proposed article was so vague as to be meaningless, and whether the amendment would have a retrospective effect.
The Court reasoned that the proposed amendment was not vague and that the purpose of the meeting was proper, distinguishing it from *NRMA v Parker* where the purpose was found to be improper. The Court found that the proposed amendment did not constitute oppressive conduct and that it was not retrospective in effect. The appeal was ultimately dismissed with costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal dismissed with costs
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.