Buy-Out of the Oppressed Minority’s Shares in Joint Stock Companies: A Comparative Analysis of Turkish, Swiss and English Law

被引:0
作者
Cem Veziroğlu
机构
[1] Koç University Law School,Research/Teaching Assistant
[2] University of Istanbul,PhD candidate
来源
European Business Organization Law Review | 2018年 / 19卷
关键词
Joint stock company; Dissolution; Unfair prejudice; Just causes; Buy-out; Minority shareholders;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Article 531 of the Turkish Commercial Code grants the right to request corporate dissolution for just causes to shareholders representing at least 10% of the capital in joint stock companies, and 5% in publicly traded companies. In addition to dissolution, the court can order purchase of the claimant’s shares at real value (buy-out remedy) or adopt a different solution. This article conducts an economic analysis of the buy-out remedy against minority oppression and compares Turkish law with Swiss and English legislation. The buy-out remedy is supposed to provide an ex post control on the controller’s conduct, and it is expected to function as a put option conditional upon oppression. However, the current provision does not provide the expected incentives. Addressing this issue, I suggest that: (1) the relief sought by the claimant should be taken into account; (2) the purchaser of the claimant’s shares should be the oppressive controller, rather than the company in question; (3) the standard of ‘just cause’ to be proven should not be equal for each remedy, and thus, the courts should be able to give a buy-out order even if the facts do not justify corporate dissolution; (4) dissolution orders should not be given in cases where there is a going-concern value to protect; and finally, (5) the valuation of the claimant’s shares should, in principle, be made on a going concern and pro rata basis, and any depreciation of the claimant’s shares due to the controller’s abusive conducts should be taken into account.
引用
收藏
页码:527 / 540
页数:13
相关论文
共 19 条
  • [1] Aker H(2016)Anonim ve Limited Şirketlerde Ortaklık Sıfatının Sona Ermesi ve Özellikle Haklı Sebeple Fesih Davasına İlişkin Bazı Değerlendirmeler BATİDER 32 63-150
  • [2] Çamoğlu E(2015)Anonim Ortaklığın Haklı Sebeple Feshinde Hakimin Takdir Yetkisi BATİDER 31 5-19
  • [3] Ertan FN(2015)Anonim Ortaklığın Haklı Sebeple Feshi Davası—TTK m. 531 Üzerinde Düşünceler İÜHFM 73 421-440
  • [4] Gilson R(1984)The mechanisms of market efficiency Va Law Rev 70 549-643
  • [5] Kraakman R(1989)The mandatory structure of corporate law Colum Law Rev 89 1549-1598
  • [6] Gordon JN(2016)Anonim Ortaklığın Haklı Sebeple Feshi Davasının Medenî Usûl Hukuku Perspektifinden Değerlendirilmesi BATİDER 32 199-270
  • [7] Hanağası E(1993)Auflösung der Aktiengesellschaft aus wichtigem Grund und andere sachgemässe Lösungen SZW (RSDA) 93 43-45
  • [8] Handschin L(1965)Mergers and the market for corporate control J Polit Econ 73 110-120
  • [9] Manne HG(2011)Yeni TTK’ya Göre Anonim Ortaklıktan Çıkarılma BATİDER 32 209-233
  • [10] Oruç M(1988)The theory of the firm: minority shareholder oppression: sections 459–461 of the Companies Act 1985 Oxf J Legal Stud 8 55-91