LA MAYORÍA NECESARIA PARA APROBAR ACUERDOS DE MERA ADMINISTRACIÓN EN LA PROPIEDAD HORIZONTAL. LOS EFECTOS DE LA ABSTENCIÓN, LOS VOTOS EN BLANCO Y LOS VOTOS NULOS EN LA FORMACIÓN DE LOS ACUERDOS COMUNITARIOS.

Abstract

One interpretation of section 17.4 of the Horizontal Property Act is to take into account the legal meaning of abstention. Such an interpretation is far more conducive to meeting the goal sought by legislators, i.e., to make it easier for resolutions concerning mere administration to be passed in second adjournment by whatever tenants are attending the meeting. Furthermore, this interpretation makes it possible to defend the idea that, in order to pass resolutions concerning mere administration in second adjournment, only the votes validly given by tenants attending the meeting must be counted. Accordingly, it is only necessary for the positive votes given by attending tenants to outnumber the negative votes given by attending tenants, provided that the positive votes, in their turn, represent a larger percentage of building ownership than do the negative votes. As a consequence, neither abstentions nor blank votes nor votes that are null and void are counted. Likewise, in the making of resolutions that require unanimity or special majorities under section 17.1 of the Horizontal Property Act, abstentions must be regarded as votes in favour of the resolution approved by the attending tenants.