Kangelaste 4: challenge to parking and the handling of requests dismissed

The court dismissed the owner’s challenge, relying on an unsigned objection and additionally examining the substance of the decisions.

Owner XX sought to set aside two parts of Korteriühistu Kangelaste 4’s meeting decision of 27 November 2012. One permitted extra parking on part of the green area; the other approved a procedure for XX’s requests: unfounded requests would not be examined, while substantive ones would be handled by the chair. XX argued that changing the shared land required every owner’s consent and that the special procedure restricted access to information. The association disputed both points. The court dismissed the entire claim. XX had attended the meeting and expressed disagreement but had not signed the objection in the minutes. The court treated this as a significant failure to meet the formal requirements for preserving a right to seek to set aside the decisions. It also examined their substance. In its view, providing extra parking fell within ordinary use of the common land rather than a substantial change in its economic purpose requiring unanimity. The meeting decision and survey sheets established the necessary majority. The court accepted delegating the handling of requests to the chair. It found no infringement of XX’s information rights or breach of good morals. These conclusions concern the documents and circumstances of this case; they do not generally permit associations to ignore members’ requests. The court acknowledged XX’s possible legal interest in reviewing the decisions but still dismissed the claim. XX bears their own costs and the association’s costs, without an amount being fixed.

The challenge to the parking and request-handling decisions was dismissed in full. XX bears their own and the association’s costs; no amount was fixed.