publication date: Sep 5, 2012
|
author/source: Adam Aptowitzer
The changeover of federal
corporations to the
Canada Not-for-Profit
Corporations Act raises interesting questions about the bylaws that a corporation
may have used since its inception. (It bears mentioning that the same questions
arise in the context of Ontario non-share capital corporations).
We have written
before that corporations continuing under the CNCA should review their bylaws
as part of the process. However, the general presumption that a corporation should
have a full set of bylaws may itself need to be reconsidered.
CNCA overlaps bylaw territory
The CNCA contains
within it the broad outlines of corporate bylaws. For federally incorporated
nonprofits, where the corporate bylaws are silent, the scheme in the act will
speak. In fact, with the exception of provisions for the admittance of members
and notice, the corporate bylaws can otherwise be silent.
In general, we have
been advising against including only the minimum number of provisions, as the
system in the CNCA is rarely completely satisfactory. Nevertheless, just
because it is prudent for corporate bylaws to deal with certain situations does
not mean that it is equally prudent for the bylaws to deal with every
situation.
Member votes sometimes difficult
Unlike the old act,
which required approval of bylaws by
Industry
Canada, the new act simply requires approval by the members. This, however,
can be easier said than done. In addition to the typical notice requirements
and raised emotions that come with changes to fundamental documents, bylaw
amendments can be subject to vetoes by different membership classes and special
majorities.
While not every
element of the bylaws may be critical to the practical operation of the
corporation, they are all subject to the same amending formula if contained
within the bylaws. For religious organizations it may be inappropriate to have
the membership vote on a change which is required by a religious functionary.
Shadow bylaws apart from official ones
Consequently, corporations
may consider creating a second set of "shadow bylaws" to deal with issues that
are important to the corporation but do not necessarily need to be in the
official bylaws. Examples may include the corporate mission, theological
directives or officer positions. All of these may be subject to occasional
change without resorting to the bylaw amending formula or a meeting of the
members.
These rules can be
given any appropriate title and can contain any provisions decided by the
members of the corporation. Similarly, the amending formula can be one decided
upon by the membership. The document will not replace the bylaws but rather
provide enhanced rules in those areas chosen by the membership. That said, it
is important that these rules do not tread into areas which are governed by the
bylaws or the act.
There
are other drawbacks as well to a secondary set of bylaws. Perhaps the most
obvious is the relative informality with which they may be treated. Corporate
bylaws have the force of law behind them to ensure compliance. Another document
purporting to be rules of the corporation simply does not. Moreover, the CNCA
requires that official bylaws be filed with Industry Canada so it is always
clear which bylaws are the official set belonging to the corporation. The same
could not be said of another informal document.
Fundamentally,
it will be up to each corporation to determine the appropriate course of
action. But, to paraphrase Robert Frost, sometimes taking the path less
travelled makes all the difference when it comes to bylaws.
Adam Aptowitzer of Drache
Aptowitzer LLP is a charity law lawyer with a national practice based in
Ottawa. He has been published in Canadian Taxpayer, Canadian Fundraising &
Philanthropy and the Not-for-Profit News. He has also published a widely
distributed study on the regulation of Canadian charities with the C.D. Howe
Institute.
As a speaker,
he has presented to the National Symposium of Charity Law, the C.D. Howe
Institute, the Association of Fundraising Professionals, the Canadian
Association of Gift Planners, the Ottawa Estate Planning Council and various
large and small Canadian charities. He has also given expert advice on
Parliament Hill. Adam is an executive member of the Canadian Bar Association's
Charity and Not-for-Profit Law section.
For speaking
engagements and consultations, contact him at 613-237-3300 or visit
http://www.drache.ca.