Notice period for a repeat meeting

A repeat meeting also required notice under the charter.

KÜ Tallinna mnt 42 (now — Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 42 korteriühistu). XX challenged point 5 of KÜ Tallinna mnt 42’s meeting decision of 7 May 2015 confirming decisions from 2002–2014. The first meeting failed for lack of a quorum. The charter required a repeat meeting within a month and 14 days’ notice. The court rejected the argument that the monthly limit allowed a meeting even the next day: the notice period still applied. The challenged point was declared void, meaning legally ineffective. The alternative request to set aside the same point was refused because the primary remedy had already been granted. The lawfulness of every earlier decision was not determined separately. Costs remained with the parties, who waived appeal.

Challenged point declared void; alternative request refused and costs left with the parties.