The four-fifths majority required to amend a management plan, how it is calculated and the procedural mistakes made most often.
The management plan is a development’s own constitution. From how service charges are apportioned to the use of common areas, from the manager’s powers to the rules on pets, the framework that governs daily life sits here. That is why amending it is tied to a heavier majority than an ordinary general assembly resolution.
The third paragraph of article 28 of the Condominium Law is explicit: amending the management plan requires the votes of four-fifths of all unit owners. The wording is four-fifths of “all unit owners”, not of “those attending the meeting”. An owner who does not attend affects the outcome as though they had voted against.
The proportion is calculated on the number of independent units. In a development of twenty independent units, at least sixteen owners must vote in favour for an amendment to pass. It is the number of independent units that counts, not the land share; that distinction is one of the points most often confused in practice.
The threshold is mandatory. It cannot be lowered by a general assembly resolution, softened by a clause inserted into the management plan, or stretched by saying that four-fifths of those attending will do. An amendment passed on a lower majority will not survive a challenge.
Even where the majority is reached, procedural errors can vitiate the resolution. Failing to observe the timing and form of the notice of meeting, voting on a matter not on the agenda, keeping the decision register improperly — each of these comes back at you later as a ground for annulment. Being in the right is not enough when the procedure has not been followed.
Nor does an amendment take full effect until it is registered. The management plan and any amendments to it are entered in the land registry; their binding force rests on that entry. A vote passing at the general assembly is the middle of the process, not the end of it.
Where the necessary majority simply cannot be assembled, unit owners have one further route: article 33 of the Condominium Law provides for the intervention of a judge. On contested matters, the court route can close an argument that has stood unresolved for years.
A practical suggestion: do not leave an amendment to the day of the general assembly. When a draft is prepared in advance and put to owners in writing, both attendance and the proportion voting in favour rise markedly. A text read out for the first time in the room almost never finds a four-fifths majority.
This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. In any actual dispute, the provisions of your own management plan and the particulars of your case will govern; please consult a legal adviser.