Auditor’s document access: refusal reversed and case remitted

Usaldusühing Pariteet-MW sought documents from Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 19 korteriühistu to audit its 2006 financial and management activities. A general meeting appointed the company on 24 October 2007. The county court refused because it considered a contract and agreement on its terms unproved. Tartu Ringkonnakohus held that approach erroneous. The appointed auditor’s document-access right and the board’s duty to provide access arose from statute and the meeting decision; a separate contract was not a prerequisite. However, the association referred to an April 2008 decision not to have this company conduct the audit. The county court had neither obtained nor examined that document. If the decision was adopted and effective, the document claim could fail. The appeal was therefore partly allowed: the earlier judgment was reversed in full and the case remitted, with costs left to the county court. This judgment did not directly order delivery of documents. On rehearing on 14 September 2009 the county court dismissed the claim: the meeting decision of 3 April 2008 cancelling Usaldusühing Pariteet-MW’s appointment remained effective, so there was no longer a right to demand documents for that audit. Separate cost rulings followed. On 6 February 2012 the circuit court reduced the reimbursement payable by Usaldusühing Pariteet-MW to the association to EUR 220.49. That was a later costs order rather than a new decision on document access.