An Amuta (not for profit association) claimed that a company signed a covenant in which it undertook to accept the authority of the Amuta's decisions, including a decision concerning the payment of monthly membership fees. On the other hand, the Company claimed that it is no longer a member of the Amuta and therefore does not have to pay membership dues. The Court accepted the company's claim that it is not a member of the Amuta and determined in principle that even if it could be considered as a company that refuses to pay membership fees to the Amuta and thus continue its membership, there is no legal way to oblige.
The Court held that an Amuta must be attractive in order for its members to want to stay there. In the circumstances of the holding, it was determined that the articles of association of the Amuta, which overrides the provisions of the Convention, do not allow for payment of membership dues in respect of a period in which the Company was not a member of the Amuta, even if the Amuta relied on dues payments.