Borsaya Kote Edilmemiş Nama Yazılı Payların Devrinde Kaçış Klozuna Başvuru Hakkının Kötüye Kullanılması
Esra CenkciAnonim ortaklıklarda nama yazılı payların devrinde devir serbestisi ilkesi geçerlidir. Bu payların devrinin sınırlandırılması istisnai olup sınırlandırma ancak kanunun izin verdiği takdirde ve kanunda izin verilen ölçüde mümkündür. Borsaya kote edilmemiş nama yazılı payların devri açısından öngörülen sınırlamalardan biri de Türk Ticaret Kanunu’nun 493/1. maddesinde düzenlenmiş olan ortaklığın kaçış klozuna başvuru hakkıdır. Bu hak ortaklığa, devredene, devre konu paylarını başvurma anındaki gerçek değeriyle kendisi, diğer pay sahipleri ya da üçüncü kişiler hesabına satın almayı önererek onay istemini reddetme imkanı tanımaktadır. Kaçış klozuna başvurmak ortaklığın takdir yetkisi kapsamındadır; ancak, ortaklığın bu yetkisi sınırsız değildir. Yetkinin sınırlarından birini de hakkın kötüye kullanılması yasağı oluşturur (Türk Medeni Kanunu 2/2). Bu çalışmada öncelikle, İsviçre Federal Mahkemesi’nin konuyla ilgili 31.7.2019 tarihli 145 III 351 nolu kararı da dikkate alınarak, kaçış klozuna başvuru hakkının hangi hallerde hakkın kötüye kullanılması yasağının ihlali niteliğinde olacağı belirlenecektir. Bu amaçla, kaçış klozuna başvuru hakkının amacı ve ortaklık tarafından bu yola hangi sebeple ya da sebeplerle başvurulabileceği ortaya konulacaktır. Ardından, kaçış klozuna başvuru hakkının kötüye kullanılmasının sonuçları, yaptırımın türü ve açılacak davanın niteliği ayrımı ile incelenecektir.
Abuse of the Escape Clause in the Transfer of Joint-Stock Non-Quoted Registered Shares
Esra CenkciJoint-stock companies usually honor the principle of freedom in transferring registered shares. The restriction on the transfer of these shares is rare and only possible if permitted by law and to the extent permitted by law. One of the restrictions to transferring non-quoted registered shares is the right to apply for the escape clause of the company, regulated in article 493/1 of the Turkish Commercial Code. This right provides the company the ability to reject the approval request by proposing the transferor purchase the shares subject to their real value and transfer them to the account of itself, other shareholders, or third parties at the time of application. Applying for the escape clause is at the discretion of the company; however, this authority is not unlimited. One limit on the authority is the prohibition of abuse of this right (Turkish Civil Code 2/2). This study determines which cases using the right to apply for the escape clause violate the abuse prohibition considering the decision of the Swiss Federal Court, dated 31.7.2019 and numbered 145 III 351. The purpose of the right to apply for the escape clause and the reasons it can be used by a company will be revealed. Then, the consequences of abusing the right to apply for the escape clause are examined by the type of sanction and the nature of the case to be filed.
This study covers the conditions of abuse of the right to apply for the escape clause, which is a restriction of share transfer regulated in article 493/1 of the Turkish Commercial Code1 , and the consequences of abuse. The study does not examine the elements of the right to apply for the escape clause in detail. The components of the right and restrictions of share transfer are mentioned in general as needed.
This study covers the conditions of abuse of the right to apply for the escape clause, which is a restriction of share transfer regulated in article 493/1 of the Turkish Commercial Code1 , and the consequences of abuse. The study does not examine the elements of the right to apply for the escape clause in detail. The components of the right and restrictions of share transfer are mentioned in general as needed.
According to the TCC 493/1, a company may reject approving share transfer in terms of non-quoted registered shares by citing a significant reason in the articles of association or by proposing that the transferor purchase shares at their real value to the account of itself, other shareholders, or third parties at the time of application. According to the second paragraph of the same article, the provisions of the articles of association regarding the composition of the shareholders’ circle constitutes a significant reason if it justifies the approval rejection in terms of the business function of the company or the economic independence of the enterprise. For the company to reject the approval request based on the significant reason indicated in the articles of association, it is not required to make a purchase proposal for the shares subject to transfer (dry rejection). The fact that the significant reason has been made public with the articles of association constitutes the justification for the company application for dry rejection.
According to the TCC 493/1, a company may reject approving share transfer in terms of non-quoted registered shares by citing a significant reason in the articles of association or by proposing that the transferor purchase shares at their real value to the account of itself, other shareholders, or third parties at the time of application. According to the second paragraph of the same article, the provisions of the articles of association regarding the composition of the shareholders’ circle constitutes a significant reason if it justifies the approval rejection in terms of the business function of the company or the economic independence of the enterprise. For the company to reject the approval request based on the significant reason indicated in the articles of association, it is not required to make a purchase proposal for the shares subject to transfer (dry rejection). The fact that the significant reason has been made public with the articles of association constitutes the justification for the company application for dry rejection.dated 31.7.2019, stated that it is unnecessary to have a significant reason to apply for this method; however, the application decision for the escape clause “must be based on a reasonable economic reason”. There is no decision of the Turkish Supreme Court of Appeals directly related to the abuse of the right to apply for the escape clause. Meanwhile, the Eleventh Civil Department of the Court, in its decision numbered 3863/5475 dated 17.9.2019, decided that the approval request could not be rejected without a justified reason, handling the TCC 493/1 without exception between the dry rejection or the escape clause.
The acceptance that the escape clause can be applied without any significant reason is contrary to the spirit of the provisions of Turkish Commercial Code 492. This acceptance makes the share transfer restrictions a rule rather than an exception and forces the joint-stock company to become a “limited liability company.” Although it is impossible to apply for the escape clause without a significant reason, it is unnecessary to indicate why in the articles of association. The reason the escape clause is applied by making a purchase proposal is that the significant reason has not been made public by the articles of association. When the right to apply for the escape clause is abused, the principle of freedom of share transfer is violated. In this case, the decision to apply for the escape clause is null, and a declaratory action can be filed against the decision under TCC 494/3. The person encumbered by the share transfer to him/her can claim that the right to apply for the escape clause has been abused by applying for the escape clause. However, the transferor who accepts the company’s purchase proposal of the company does not have the right to sue. The decision of the court as a result of this action is retroactive (ex tunc). It is not able to apply the provision of the TCC 497/4 using the method of analogy. Acceptance of the contrary encourages the abuse of the right to apply for the escape clause and is contrary to the TCC 494/3.
