Yapısal değişiklikler ve kurucu menfaatleri

Date
2016
Editor(s)
Advisor
Supervisor
Co-Advisor
Co-Supervisor
Instructor
Source Title
Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Dergisi
Print ISSN
1300-1396
Electronic ISSN
Publisher
Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü
Volume
32
Issue
4
Pages
173 - 200
Language
Turkish
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Series
Abstract

Kurucu menfaatleri bir paya ya da pay grubuna bağlı değildir. Menfaatler kapsamında tanınan hakların kaynağını, anonim ortaklıkla kurucu (menfaat sahibi) arasında gerçekleştirilen bir sözleşme oluşturur. Haklar, bahis konusu sözleşmenin anonim ortaklık esas sözleşmesine aktarılmasının ardından ortaklığın Ticaret Sicili'ne tescil edilmesiyle doğar. Hakların anonim ortaklıkla menfaat sahibi arasındaki sözleşmeden kaynaklanmaları nedeniyle, ortaklığın, karşı tarafın onayı bulunmaksızın tek taraflı olarak kurucu menfaatlerini sınırlandırması veya ortadan kaldırması mümkün değildir. Öte yandan, bu durum, haklarına dolaylı olarak etki eden ortaklık kararlarının da menfaat sahiplerine karşı hüküm ifade etmeyeceği anlamına gelmez. Zira ortaklık organları, ortaklığın amacına ulaşmasına ve gelişimine katkıda bulunacak kararları bağımsız biçimde alabilmeli ve yerine getirebilmelidir. Anonim ortaklıkların yapısal değişikliklere ilişkin karar ve işlemleri de kurucu menfaatlerine dolaylı olarak etki eden ortaklık kararları arasında yer alır.bir tazminat ödeneceği sonucuna varılabilmektedir. Mehaz Kanun'da, hakların aynı şekilde korunamaması olasılığı için yalnızca "uygun bir tazminat" ödenmesi olanağı öngörülmüş olmasına rağmen, İsviçre öğretisi tarafından ortaya konan, hakların artırılması ya da hakların zarara uğradığı oranda menfaat sahibine denkleştirme tazminatı ödenmesi alternatiflerinin, TTK md. 191 hükmü kaynak gösterilerek, Türk hukukunda da uygulanması mümkündür.


Benefits that can be granted to the founders of a company limited by shares” (benefits of founders) are not related to any “share” or “group of shares”. Instead, the rights derive from a contract concluded between the founder (the owner of the benefit) and the company, which are then integrated into the Articles of Incorporation. The rights are established through the registration of the company to the Commercial Register. Since the rights originate from the contract between the company and the owner of the benefit, the former cannot restrict or abolish them through unilateral transactions, without obtaining the consent of the opposite party. However, this does not mean that decisions indirectly affecting the benefits of founders would also be invalid against the owners of these rights, while the organs of the company are entitled to independently take decisions that are necessary for the attainment of the company’s goals and would serve its improvement. The organs are equally competent to take necessary measures for the application of such decisions. The decisions and acts of a company regarding structural changes are an example to the abovementioned situations. In cases of structural changes, it is not necessary to take the specificities of the particular case into account, in order to determine the effects of the decision and the following change in the articles of incorporation on founders’ rights, and their potential claims against the company, since the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC) has foreseen special provisions regarding the effects of structural changes on the rights of certain right holders. Among these right holders are the owners of participation certificates, who resemble the owners of the benefits of founders for the rights of both groups arise out of a contract between them and the company. TCC states, “The acquiring company must grant holders of participation certificates in the target company equal rights, or it should buy the certificates ... on the actual value”. Since the Preambles of relevant TCC articles also suggest the intention of the lawmaker as the inclusion of benefits of founders” in the protective scope of the articles, it can be deduced that, in cases of structural changes, those are also to be retained in the new structure the way they were and in case of an impossibility, the right holders are to be appropriately compensated. Even though the reference law only foresees the possibility of “payment of adequate damages” in cases of failure of retainment of the rights as they were, alternatives suggested by the Swiss doctrine, namely, enhancement of the rights or payment of compensatory damages, could also be applied in Turkish law, Art. 191 TCC being the legal ground.

Course
Other identifiers
Book Title
Citation
Published Version (Please cite this version)