A right of a majority of the managing directors to force through changes?

[FAQthis]

Background - A small block of Flats owned as shares in a Ltd Company by its occupants.
Can a majority vote in the management force the company and all occupants to abide by their new land management plan?
A plan that will for example govern how vehicles access parts of the land. How plants and trees can and cant be planted.

Or is the company required to have the permission of all owners in this case?

Cheers.

[AndrewDod]

The only thing that matters is the lease(s) - a majority vote does not change the leases

If it is a matter of something the lases would not address (what exact color of paint is applied to the walls) that could certainly be decided based on the company setup

Theoretical questions are less helpful than actual ones

[Hudson01]

As said above..... the lease governs everything, if vehicle access is by a certain route and the residents are going over a grassed areas etc then yes they can, and in my opinion they have a duty to the other leaseholders/shareholders to do so, it stops the area becoming scruffy or encouraging the building on communal land.

[FAQthis]

AndrewDod,

OK So the Lease says little on the subject other than 'don't cut trees' and 'care for the garden'. Do they ever contain a land management plan? And given that ours doesn't can one be created in detail without the consent of all share owners? Specifically the proposed plan contains new limiting rules, preventing vehicles using old tracks, as an ideology to reduce impact on the land. Can that be enforced?

[AndrewDod]

I don't think it has anything to do with land management. It has to do with whether vehicles can park or use the tracks they do use.

If the lease permits such use (or any use) I don't think you can prevent it. If the lease says you cannot play football in x area, then you cannot. If it says the area is for common use, you would be hard pressed to prevent football playing by kids.

So what will someone not be able to do that the lease did not prohibit before?

Someone obviously disagrees, else there would not be an issue.