Rana v Survery (No 1) [2012] NSWSC 439

Rana v Survery (No 1) [2012] NSWSC 439

The Constitution gave the Foundation Members a choice between expelling a member from the Association or suspending a member for a specified period. It did not authorise the hybrid sanction of expulsion for a specified period. Because the five year qualification was central to the resolution and affected substantive membership rights, it could not be ignored, excised, or treated as a procedural irregularity. The resolution was therefore invalid.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Separate Question / Hearing of Separate Issue
Outcome
Resolution invalid
Legal Topics
['expulsion of Members' 'suspension of Members' 'construction of Association Constitution' 'strict Adherence to Disciplinary Rules' 'procedural Irregularity']
['incorporated Associations' 'equity'] ['expulsion of Members' 'suspension of Members' 'construction of Association Constitution' 'strict Adherence to Disciplinary Rules' 'procedural Irregularity']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Separate Question / Hearing of Separate Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether a resolution of the Foundation Members expelling the plaintiffs from the Association for five years was authorised by the Association's Constitution." 'Whether the court should ignore or excise the five year qualification from the expulsion resolution.' 'Whether section 33 of the Interpretation Act 1987 or section 1322 of the Corporations Act (Cth) 2001 assisted the defendants.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitution gave the Foundation Members a choice between expelling a member from the Association or suspending a member for a specified period. It did not authorise the hybrid sanction of expulsion for a specified period. Because the five year qualification was central to the resolution and affected substantive membership rights, it could not be ignored, excised, or treated as a procedural irregularity. The resolution was therefore invalid.

Court Disposition

Resolution invalid

Orders

  • ['The resolution of the Foundation Members of the Association made on 18 December 2011 and confirmed on 22 January 2012 is invalid.' "The defendants should pay the plaintiffs' costs of the hearing of the separate issue."]