On Mon, 8 Jul 2002, Adam Todd wrote:

> >The *very next* section of the Act you quote states:
> >
> >"CORPORATIONS ACT 2001 SECT 203E
> >203E Director cannot be removed by other directors--public companies
> >A resolution, request or notice of any or all of the directors of a public 
> >company is void to the extent that it purports to:
> 
> However, if I recall correctly, this section refers to a PUBLIC LISTED 
> company, not a LIMITED company.

IANAL.

However, I can read. There's nothing in the 2 sections referred to
(or the sections around them) that indicates to me they are applicable
to different types of company.

Ergo, the two sections refer to to *the same type* of company. 
I don't know whether auDA is such a company or not (and it's irrelevant).

If s203e doesn't apply (as you state above) then neither does 203d.
If it *does* apply, then 203d does too.

a) If 203d/e don't apply; you can't use 203d as a reference to back
your assertation that a Director should be removed by a Member and
that 'someone doesn't know their corporations law'.

b) If 203d/e apply, 203e explicitly prevents a Director from acting as 
you've suggested in your reference to 203d.

Regards,

Saliya