Quanta members will now be receiving their AGM information and will note that 
no one is willing to stand for office as Treasurer. Once again it is repeated 
that John Gilpin has to stand down because of the six year rule. This is based 
on a misunderstanding of the Quanta constitution. 

Clause 5.2 of the Quanta Constitution begins with the words:

"Save as provided in clause 5.3 below..."

You do not have to be a lawyer to appreciate that this qualifies the clause and 
indicates that it is not universally applicable. There are exceptions to the 
six year rule and we have to look at clause 5.3 to discover these.

Clause 5.3 is solely concerned with the situation of the officers and thus we 
can conclude that any exceptions to the six year rule only apply to the 
officers and not to ordinary committee members.

Here it becomes complicated because clause 5.3 is a badly drafted section of 
the constitution and contains something that is legally impossible. However in 
a cumbersome and roundabout way it tells us that the officers serve a 3 year 
period of office.

It is therefore a reasonable assumption that the officers are excluded from the 
6 year rule because they serve a 3 year period of office.

Clause 5.4 provides the confirmation that that assumption is correct because it 
defines the one circumstance in which the six year rule does apply to officers. 
This is "at the expiration of the third year of office" and applies when the 
officer has served on the committee "for more than six years". 

Note those last five words. The Quanta Constitution allows for a situation in 
which officers can serve for longer than six years.

In other words John Gilpin does not have to stand down as treasurer until the 
end of his present three year term of office in 2012.

I am quite happy for people to dispute this interpretation of the Quanta 
Constitution, but I shall expect it to be done by detailed legal argument and 
not the usual Quanta bigotry.

Two further problems for the Quanta Committee.

1: The wording of clause 5.4 is ambiguous and could give rise to problems in 
2012.

2: Clarity needs to be given to the members over the situation regarding the 
treasurer if John Gilpin does stand down. Can an officer be co-opted to the 
committee as distinct from an ordinary committee member? If so, what would be 
his status? Would he have the full rights of an officer?. What would be his 
legal period of office? Can an unelected officer be authorised to sign cheques 
up to the value of £1,000 on behalf of Quanta?


Best Wishes,



Geoff
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Reply via email to