Christopher Kreuzer wrote:It depends on what happens next, I suppose, but who replaces any of the current board members if this becomes necessary? If enough board members resign, would that force an EGM?
We've been here before, at the time of the Regan walk-out in 2008. Provided the remaining directors form a quorum and they wouldn't be a majority if they didn't, they just make appointments to the vacant positions. No EGM is needed, unless enough people call one. Even then, it wouldn't directly elect new directors. This is Companies Act stuff, not particularly unique to the ECF.
If sufficient of the voting membership demand it, it can also be possible for the voters to convene an EGM to remove a Director. Although Nigel isn't formally a director, it was what AP was indicating as his intention to remove Nigel by these means.
Angus French wrote:Assuming the story is true: I wonder on what grounds a "no confidence" vote was taken?
Wanting to remove Nigel from the FIDE Delegate position is one possibility, but the general silence from the ECF over strategic matters for about three months may indicate a seriously divided board.
I don't think the meeting with Kasparov during the London classic was ever a formal meeting to be minuted, but they could have posed a la Kirsan and issued a statement on the website.
