Amended heating charges in the articles: declaration of voidness refused

XX challenged KÜ Vana Loss’s meeting decision of 20 December 2012. The association is now named Narva linn, Suur tn 8 korteriühistu. The amendment provided meter-based heating charges for non-residential premises plus an indirect-heating charge calculated from part of the floor area. XX considered this an unfair increase in other owners’ expenses and sought a declaration of voidness on grounds of conflict with good morals. The association also disputed membership, timeliness and entitlement to bring the claim. The county court recognised XX’s membership and distinguished a declaration of voidness from an ordinary claim to invalidate a decision: the latter’s three-month limit did not justify rejecting the claim actually brought. However, voidness was not established. Possible unlawfulness did not automatically amount to conflict with good morals. The court considered the calculations and indirect-heating information insufficient to prove disproportion of that kind. Participation in voting by members from other buildings within the same association was not held unlawful, and allegations of vote manipulation were not proved. On 28 November 2013 the claim was dismissed and costs allocated to XX. This neither separately awarded payment of invoices nor determined the lawfulness of alterations to the heating system. Confirmed subsequent development: on 17 March 2014 the circuit court dismissed the appeal and upheld the refusal, allocating costs in both instances to the claimant. Entry into force and actual enforcement have not been separately reverified.