Two judgments handed down by the Queensland Supreme Court days before Christmas 2021 join the growing number of cases where peak bodies are being caught out by their old constitutions and lack of understanding of their provisions.

The 2 cases involved Netball in Queensland [1] and Canine Control Council (Queensland) trading as Dogs Queensland[2].

Out of Bounds

Netball Queensland is a company limited by guarantee, which was established in 1971 as the governing body for netball in Queensland.

Ipswich Netball Association Inc (Ipswich Netball) is an incorporated association and is recognised by Netball Queensland as representing a geographic area or group of clubs.

A series of disputes arose between the two. Netball Queensland’s board resolved:

  • not to renew Ipswich Netball’s affiliation;
  • not to re-affiliate Ipswich Netball unless there was a major change in the management committee; and
  • not to consider affiliation of Ipswich Netball until after its AGM and SGM, with assurances in relation to conduct and civil and responsible communication.

Ipswich Netball sought the assistance of the Queensland Supreme Court to declare that its non-renewal of affiliation was as invalid.

After examining Netball Queensland’s company constitution, the Court noticed a distinction between a member and an ‘affiliation’. While the constitution gave Netball Queensland power to make decisions about members, this was not the case for affiliations.

In fact, it found that affiliated members were a class of members that are largely protected by the corporate law from the arbitrary variation of their rights, unless the constitution said otherwise, and it did not in this case.

So the statutory default provisions apply, being that the class rights may only be varied by a special resolution passed at a meeting of the class of members whose rights are being varied or with the written consent of 75% of the members.

Further, the Court found that the policy is an impermissible variation of class rights under the Corporations Act and is therefore invalid. Further remarking that, [at 76]

It must be said from the outset, that the Policy is poorly drafted. No clear definitions are provided, and the use of the similar terms affiliation, Affiliates and Affiliated Member Associations is prone to confusion. “

The Court found that the decisions were not authorised and were therefore invalid. Netball Queensland was ordered to reinstate Ipswich Netball’s rights and privileges as a Member Association.

Gone to the Dogs

The purpose of Dogs Queensland is to bring together people with interests in breeding, training, and showing purebred registered dogs and to provide them with an opportunity to associate in order to promote best practices.

Mr Woodrow was a member of Dogs Queensland and in 2019 was appointed as a director of Dogs Queensland. Later in 2019, Mr Woodrow was suspended as a member of Dogs Queensland for 4 years because of a social media post that was a breach of Dogs Queensland’s social media policy.

Dogs Queensland then wrote to Mr Woodrow stating that, on the basis of the organisation’s constitution, his position as a director was vacated until the end of his period of suspension.

The Court found that, for the period of his suspension, Mr Woodrow lost all of the benefits of membership. That included the right to nominate for a position as a director.  However, his loss of those benefits had no consequence because he had already been elected as a director, and so the regime for removing directors applied.

There was no constitutional provision requiring a director to be a member of the company to continue to hold the position.

The Court declared the board resolution determining Mr Woodrow had ceased to be a director was ineffective.

Comment

While many recognise the need for legal expertise in drafting a constitution, from time to time by-laws or policies are made or altered without legal review that can result in unexpected consequences as was the case in this situation.

There are increasing numbers of national or state federated bodies, sporting networks and political parties disputes which are spilling into the Courts. Generally, the root causes appear to be legal structures from a bygone era that are not fit for the purposes of the current organisation, and lack of appreciation by the governance team and senior management of such legal structures and their limitations.  Further, the matters appear to end up in the Appeal Courts more often than not, adding to the primary Court costs and lengthy diversions of board and management focus into unproductive disputes.

Ensuring that your constitution and by-laws are fit-for-purpose and understood by all concerned is an ounce of prevention that can save your organisation a fortune and a lot of grief.

[1] Ipswich Netball Association Inc v Netball Queensland Limited [2021] QSC 348

[2] Woodrow v Canine Control Council (Queensland) Ltd (Trading as Dogs Queensland) [2021] QSC 327

Latest News


April 18, 2024

A housing trust’s modernisation requires Court approval

Background The Baxter Homes Trust (Trust), was a charitable trust established in Victoria by a deed executed in 1960. Its purpose was to provide aged inhabitants of Geelong Victoria or its neighbourhood with housing as administered by The Geelong and Western District Ladies Benevolent Association’ incorporated under the Hospitals and Charities Act 1890. The Trust A housing trust’s modernisation requires Court approval

Read Article

April 18, 2024

Draft Regulations for NPO Self-Review Assessment Return Released

We have previously written in bulletins about the forthcoming self-assessment tax review for non-profit profit organisations which have an Australian Business Number (ABN) but are not registered as charities with the ACNC – Be alert to being alarmed on viewing your club or society annual report this year and self-assessment by tax-exempt. The background is Draft Regulations for NPO Self-Review Assessment Return Released

Read Article

March 13, 2024

Last of the loopholes? Let’s hope so!

Background All Australian employers will be acutely aware that the Federal government has, since the last election, embarked on a fairly aggressive program of targeted changes to the nation’s industrial relations laws. So far, we’ve had changes aimed at supporting Australia’s jobs and economic recovery[1], gained more respect at work[2], we’ve secured our jobs and Last of the loopholes? Let’s hope so!

Read Article