I KNOW SOME BRIDGE CLUB COMMITTEES CAN BE BLINKERED AND BLOODY MINDED.....BUT THIS ONE COMPLETELY BEGGARS BELIEF 

( A true story that goes one step beyond the bizarre. The real names of the bad and the ugly have been discretely omitted for fear of heaping even more shame and humiliation upon them. )

A bit of background :
One rather nasty piece of work took it upon herself to put in a completely unjustified complaint against a certain Mr.Good. For reasons that go beyond the pale she easily convinces four very obliging and gung ho committee members to embark upon a witch hunt against this decent and honest individual.  These four baddies seized upon this complaint to rid the club of someone belonging to " the other side ".  Engaging in all sorts of behind-the-scenes shenanigans, and ignoring all proper procedures and rules of natural justice , they finally held a committee meeting between themselves to do the dirty deed. Although they denied their victim his basic rights under the Constitution , they did at least meet one requirement of the club's disciplinary code , namely a 4-0 majority vote needed to get him expelled. The disproportionate punishment in relation to the pettiness of the alleged offence , the failure to follow the club's own disciplinary procedures , the complete and utter disregard to adhere to rules of natural justice, and the fact that Mr. Good did so much good work for the club.... all accounted for nothing.
However, before Mr.Good had been notified of the committee's decision to kick him out , having undertaken a hearing in his absence , supporters in his camp had made enquiries as to legal implications for both sides. The contents of two letters they received ( shown below ) were made known to the rogue conspirators,  who then proceeded to ignore the reality of the situation . These were people who were not to back down without a fight. 
Exhibit (a) : A letter from one of the top people in the EBU who attempted to spell out the manner and way expulsions needed be carried out , which would stand up to legal scrutiny and approval : 

To whom it may concern

Thanks for your phone call this morning. Whilst I cannot comment on anything specific you told me I would make the following observations of a general nature.

A) Committee meetings should be open to all committee members. It is inappropriate to call a committee meeting where some of the committee have not been invited. Decisions made by such a meeting are probably unconstitutional.

B) Matters raised at committee meetings under 'Any other business' should not relate to substantive proposals that should have been proper agenda items for which proper notice should have been given.

C) Disciplinary procedures. The following is from the EBU Model Club Constitution:  -  

15.            CONDUCT

15.1.   In the event of a complaint being made to the Committee about the conduct of a member of the Club the Committee may (and if a written complaint is received signed by at least three members of the Club, it shall) investigate the complaint.

15.2.   On investigating such a complaint the Committee shall give the member about whose conduct the complaint has been made an opportunity to be heard and put forward evidence in their defence (this includes witnesses if appropriate). If a live Hearing takes place the member may be accompanied by a friend or representative who need not be a member of the club.  Additionally, the member has the right to have questions put to the complainant and supporting witnesses (if any) by the Committee.

15.3.   If on investigating such a complaint the Committee is of the opinion that the member has behaved in an unacceptable manner or in such a manner as to cause injury to the interests of the Club, then the Committee may reprimand the member, suspend the member from the privileges of membership for such period as it may think fit, or expel the member from the Club.

15.4.   The Committee shall forthwith notify the member of any decision made on the investigation of a complaint about his conduct, and may if it thinks fit publicise the decision by displaying a notice at the headquarters of the Club.

15.5.   An appeal shall lie to a General Meeting of the Club against any decision to reprimand, suspend or expel a member of the Club following the investigation of a complaint about his conduct.

15.6.   Notice of such an appeal must be in writing, and delivered to the Secretary within two weeks of the notification to the member of the decision of the Committee.

Exhibit (b) A letter from a solicitor which attempts to outline the importance of following agreed procedures and observing rules of natural justice :

Dear Interested Party  

Thank you for your e-mail which I have been through.  It appears to me that the position is as follows: 

I have read the rules of your Bridge Club.  The expulsion of a member is dealt with at rule 3.2.  The committee may by majority of not less than 4 expel any member.  Under 7.2 a quorum of committee is 5 members.  

If any member is expelled and the procedure is not carried out as above then it is ultra vires (no legal effect) as it is made in breach of the club’s own constitutional rules. 

If the procedure is carried out correctly then decisions can be challenged if they breach rules of natural justice.  I think it would be useful if you looked at the EBU Model Constitution as this constitution has been drafted to comply with rules of natural justice. 

There are two areas which are helpful to you in applying rules of natural justice: 

1.       If a decision has been made by the committee without proper prior notification of what is going to be discussed then the committee decision could be challenged as being contrary to rules of natural justice.  As I understand it, the reference to rule 74 does not in any way cover the expulsion of a member.  However, there is probably sufficient alternative evidence to suggest that Mr.Good’s expulsion is going to be considered at the next committee meeting in view of the emails and telephone calls which have taken place subsequently.  However, if all members are not notified and proper notification is not given of items to be discussed then any decision made may have been made contrary to rules of natural justice.

2.      The biggest area of deficiency as I see the rules is that any member who has the threat of expulsion has no right of representation nor are there any appeal processes.  I refer you specifically to clause 15 of the draft model.  In every private member club I have advised I think, without exception, if a member is to be expelled then they have the right to receive prior notification and for a hearing where a decision is made so that both parties views are aired.  I would also expect an appeal process to be provided for.  You will see clause 15 deals with these issues. 

If a decision is made by the committee which the members do not approve of the other alternative would be to call a general meeting of the club under rule 8.4.  The president is obliged to call an EGM if requested by at least 7 members.  The EGM could provide for the reinstatement of Mr. Good or expulsion of various committee members.  In general terms, committee members are there to carry out the wishes of the membership. Accordingly, members can always overrule decisions of the committee. 

I hope you find this email useful.  If you need to discuss with me further, please do not hesitate to telephone me. 

Once the content of these letters brought come home the fact they were batting on a very tricky wicket , they decided on one last throw of the dice. Time for an ultimatum : either Mr.Good had to go or " we do ". Thankfully , the majority of club members had by now lost faith with the bad and the ugly , and were therefore happy to back the good guys.  So off went the baddies to seek new pastures , taking with them the arch-villian Mrs. Black, who was now ready to inflict on other clubs her poisonous behaviour and antics .
All this, of course, illustrates the worst characteristics of the human condition: prejudice, ignorance, stupidity, arrogance , stubbornness and outright bloody-mindedness of power-crazed individuals. 

Thankfully, these blinkered bullies failed in their botched attempt to run roughshod over those they disliked , and their departure strangely coincided with the revival of a very friendly and sociable atmosphere within the club , which members now have come to appreciate and enjoy. 
The full story is one which a book should be written about. a book which demonstrates how blinkered and blood minded committees can get. A book which would reveal the dark side of a very bizarre world of bridge.