Meeting regulations
Handling conflicts of interest at the meeting
It is common for a co-owner at a meeting to have a personal interest that differs from, or opposes, that of the community: the property manager voting on their own fee, a co-owner whose completed work is being discussed for approval, someone who has an ongoing contract with the supplier under discussion. Italian civil law does not forbid these people from voting, but it imposes fairness duties and allows the resolution to be challenged if the conflict affected the outcome. This guide explains when a conflict of interest arises, how voting works in these cases, which resolutions can be annulled, and what practice reduces the risk of disputes.
What counts as a conflict of interest at the meeting
A conflict of interest arises when a co-owner, voting on a specific agenda item, pursues a personal interest that clashes with the interest of the condominium as a whole. Italian law does not set a general ban on voting for a co-owner in conflict: unlike corporate law, the civil code has no provision for condominiums equivalent to the rule on shareholder conflicts of interest in companies. In principle, even a co-owner with a personal interest can vote and be counted toward the quorum.
Typical cases recur in practice: the property manager who, being also a co-owner, votes on their own appointment or fee, a co-owner who carried out work on the building and votes on approving that work, someone who owes money to the condominium and votes on a debt recovery resolution, or someone with family or business ties to the supplier under contract.
Case law distinguishes between a merely potential conflict, which does not by itself invalidate the resolution, and an abuse of majority, when the vote of the conflicted co-owner turns out to be decisive in approving a decision contrary to the collective interest or damaging to the rights of other co-owners.
Can the conflicted co-owner's vote be excluded?
The property manager has no power to prevent a co-owner from voting merely because that person is in a conflict of interest: denying the right to vote without a legal basis exposes the resolution to challenge on a different ground, namely the violation of the right to participate.
The situation differs when the meeting votes on the property manager's own liability, on their removal for serious irregularities, or on approving financial statements they themselves drafted: here case law tends to apply the principle that no one can be judge of their own conduct, but the practical answer still requires checking, case by case, whether the vote was decisive and whether the resolution actually harmed the other co-owners.
Sound practice suggests some precautions regardless: recording the declared or detected conflict in the minutes, calculating the voting result separately with and without the interested co-owner's vote, and letting the informed assembly weigh the matter before proceeding.
When the resolution can be annulled
A resolution passed with the decisive vote of a co-owner in conflict of interest is not void, but voidable, under article 1137 of the civil code: it still produces effects until a court annuls it following a challenge, and the action must be brought within thirty days, running from communication of the minutes for absent co-owners or from the date of the meeting for those present who voted against or abstained.
For the challenge to succeed, the person bringing it must prove not only that a conflict existed, but also that the interested co-owner's vote was decisive in reaching the required majority: if the resolution would have passed anyway without that vote, annulment is not warranted.
Anyone who did not challenge within the deadline, or who voted in favor of the resolution, cannot later raise the conflict of interest as a ground for invalidity: the expiry of the thirty day term makes the resolution stable and binding even for those who believe they were harmed.
Good practice for the property manager
To reduce the risk of challenges, the property manager should adopt some operational precautions: clearly flag in the agenda the item where a conflict might arise, invite the interested co-owner to declare it explicitly before the vote, and record in the minutes both the declaration and the voting outcome calculated under both scenarios, with and without the contested vote.
On the property manager's fee and appointment, which remain the most frequent cases, it is useful to precede the vote with a transparent comparison of quotes and terms, so that the vote of the outgoing or incoming manager, if also a co-owner, is not the sole element supporting the decision.
Accurate documentation of the minutes, the calculated quorums, and the declarations made at the meeting is the most effective defense in case of dispute: software such as AmministraPro, which structures minute taking and quorum calculation for resolutions, helps keep this traceable and orderly, reducing the risk of procedural errors that compound the substance of a challenge.
Frequently asked questions
Can a co-owner in a conflict of interest be excluded from voting at the meeting?
No, the property manager has no power to deny a co-owner the right to vote simply because that person is in a conflict of interest: Italian civil law does not set, for condominiums, a voting ban comparable to the one applied to shareholders in conflict within companies. Excluding the vote without a legal basis exposes the resolution to challenge for violating the right to participate. Protection against the conflict of interest operates afterward, through a possible challenge to the resolution if the vote proved decisive and damaging to the community.
How long do you have to challenge a resolution affected by a conflict of interest?
The deadline is thirty days, under article 1137 of the civil code: it runs from the date of the meeting for co-owners present who voted against or abstained, and from the date the minutes are communicated for those absent. Once this term expires, the resolution becomes stable and can no longer be challenged on this ground, even if the conflict of interest genuinely existed. This makes it important to check the notice records and the date the minutes were received, information a management platform such as AmministraPro keeps traceable.
What is the difference between a void resolution and a voidable one due to conflict of interest?
A resolution affected by a conflict of interest is voidable, not void: it produces its effects until a court annuls it following a challenge brought by an entitled co-owner within thirty days. Nullity, reserved for more serious defects such as an impossible subject matter or decisions affecting non-waivable individual rights, has no expiry deadline and can be raised at any time. This distinction, established by case law since the 2005 joint sections ruling, is decisive in determining whether an action is still available.
Is the vote of a property manager who is also a co-owner on their own fee always valid?
The vote is formally allowed, since the law does not forbid it, but if it turns out to be decisive in approving a fee not justified by quotes or market conditions, the resolution can be challenged for abuse of majority and conflict of interest. The more prudent practice is to precede the vote with a transparent comparison of several quotes, record the interested manager's declaration of conflict in the minutes, and calculate the voting outcome separately with and without their contribution, so it can be shown the decision would have held regardless.
How can condominium management software help prevent disputes over conflicts of interest?
Software such as AmministraPro does not eliminate a conflict of interest, which is a substantive matter, but it reduces the risk of procedural defects compounding the dispute: by structuring minute taking, quorum calculation, and traceability of notices, the property manager can show precisely whether a vote was decisive, when the minutes were communicated, and what declarations were made at the meeting. These documentary elements are often decisive in the outcome of a challenge.
Try AmministraPro
Accounting, thousandths-based cost splitting, meetings, communications and artificial intelligence in a single Italian software, compliant with UNI 10801 and GDPR.