AZINLIK PAY SAHİPLERİNİN KORUNMASI İLKESİNE YÖNELİK TARTIŞMALAR
Bu makale, azınlık pay sahiplerinin menfaatlerini korumak için onlara tanınan hakların gerekliliğine ilişkin öğretide yer alan farklı tartışmalara yer vermektedir. Öncelikle azınlık hissedarların korunmasının gerekliliğine karşı geliştirilen argümanlara yer verilecek sonrasında ise karşıt görüş olarak azınlıkların korunması gerektiğini savunan görüşler ve gerekçeleri sunulacaktır. Çoğunluk paylara sahip olan pay sahipleri şirkette sahip oldukları yüksek oy oranı ve bu kapsamda sahip oldukları yetkiler ile azınlık hissedarların haklarını göz ardı edebilmektedirve bu durum azınlık pay sahipleri üzerinde olumsuz sonuçlar doğurmaktadır. Hatta geniş çerçevede düşünüldüğünde bu durumun ülke ekonomisine bile olumsuz yansımaları olabilmektedir. İşte bu olumsuz etkileri bertaraf edebilmek için azınlık pay sahiplerine kapsamlı bir koruma sağlanmaktadır. Ancak, sadece azınlıkların koruması yeterli olmayıp, şirkette payların çoğunluğuna sahip olan çoğunluk pay sahiplerinin de şirketteki yetkilerini kötüye kullanmalarının önüne geçmek için düzenlemeler yapılması gerekmektedir. Bu makalede, azınlık pay sahiplerinin karşılaşabileceği benzer sorunlara farklı hukuk sistemlerinde nasıl çözümler bulduğunu görmek için azınlık hissedarların korunması ilkesi Türk şirketler hukuku ve İngiliz şirketler hukuku kapsamında ele alınacaktır.
DISCUSSIONS SURROUNDING THE PRINCIPLE OF MINORITY SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION
This article analyses the arguments of those who do not necessarily agree with certain rights to be granted to the minority shareholders in companies to protect their interests. Following the presentation of those arguments, the attention will be given on opposite views in this regard to understand the necessity of the existence of minority shareholder protection. Since majority shareholders have higher percentage of the capital, so that the voting powers, their approach unfortunately ignores the rights of minority shareholders in most cases. This abusive approach of majority shareholders affects the interests of minority shareholders and companies in a negative way. In addition, whole national economy is adversely affected from this situation. To find a solution for this problem, inclusive protection is provided to minority shareholders. With regard to this situation, while inclusive protection is provided for minority shareholders to gain an adequate remedy, there should nevertheless be a legal framework which prevents majority shareholders’ misuse of their corporate powers. In this article, the principle of minority shareholder protection will also be considered in the light of Turkish and English company law to see how different jurisdictions found the solutions for similar problems regarding minority shareholders.
___
- Ararat, Melsa&Uğur, Mehmet (2003),
`Corporate Governance in Turkey: An Overview
and Some Policy Recommendations` Corporate
Governance: The International Journal of Business
in Society, V:3.
- Briano-Turrent, Guadalupe del Carmen&
Rodríguez-Ariza, Lázaro (2016), 'Corporate
Governance Ratings on Listed Companies: An
Institutional Perspective in Latin America',
European Journal of Management and Business
Economics, V:25.
- Brown Richard E (2005), 'Enron/Andersen:
Crisis in U.S. Accounting and Lessons for
Government', Public Budgeting & Finance, V:25.
- Çamoglu, Ersin (2010), Anonim Ortaklık
Yönetim Kurulu Üyelerinin Hukuki Sorumluluğu /
The Liability of Directors in Joint Stock Companies,
1. Edition, Vedat Press, İstanbul.
- Cheffins, Brian (2000) 'Minority
Shareholders and Corporate Governance' Company
Lawyer, V:21, p. 41.
- Dahya, Jay& Dimitrov Orlin& McConnell
John J. (2008), 'Dominant Shareholders, Corporate
Boards, and Corporate Value: A Cross-Country
Analysis', Journal of Financial Economics V:87.
- Dignam, Alan (2011), Andrew Hicks and
S.H. Goo, Hicks & Goo's Cases and Materials on
Company Law, 7. Edition, Oxford, Oxford
University Press.
- Engin, Cem&Golluce, Esra (2016), 'Küresel
Finans Krizi ve Türkiye Üzerine Yansımaları / The
Global Financial Crisis in 2008 and Its Reflections
on Turkey' Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam
Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi
Dergisi, V:1.
- Erdem, Nuri (2019), Anonim Ortaklığın
Haklı Sebeple Feshi, 2. Edition, Vedat Press,
İstanbul.
- Hallington, Robin (2007), 'Oppression of
Minority Shareholders: Reflections on Blisset v
Daniel', Denning Law Journal, V:19.
- Hannigan, Brenda (2009), ‘Drawing
boundaries between derivative claims and unfairly
prejudicial petitions’, Journal of Business Law, V:6.
- Jeeballah, A Abubaker (2016)., 'To What
Extent Does The Libyan Shareholder Protection
Regime Offer Equivalent Protection To That Found
In Similar Selected Corporate Law Systems?', Ph.D
thesis, Lancaster University.
- Joffe, Victor (2008), Minority Shareholders,
1. Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
- Keay Andrew (2015), 'Assessing and
Rethinking the Statutory Scheme for Derivative
Actions under the Companies Act 2006', Journal of
Corporate Law Studies, V:16.
- Keay, Andrew & Loughrey, Joan (2010),
'Derivative Proceedings in a Brave New World for
Company Management and Shareholders', Journal
of Business Law, V:3.
- Kershaw, David (2015), ‘The Rule in Foss v
Harbottle is Dead: Long Live the Rule in Foss v
Harbottle’, Journal of Business Law.
- Kılınç, Pınar Buket (2012), 'Development of
Corporate Governance, the Corporate Governance
Approach of the Banking Sector, and the Effects of
Corporate Governance on the Financial Structure of
the Banking Sector's Companies: Research on the
ISE 100 Index and the ISE Corporate Governance
Index (XKURY)' (Masters, University of Hamburg,
2012).
- Kim, Kenneth A.& KitsabunnaratChatjuthamard P & Nofsinger John R. (2007),
'Large Shareholders, Board Independence, and
Minority Shareholder Rights: Evidence from
Europe', Journal of Corporate Finance, V:13.
- La Porta, Rafael& Lopez-de-Silanes,
Florencio& Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W.
(1998), ‘Law and Finance’, Journal of Political
Economy, V:106.
- Lazarides, Themistokles G. (2010), 'Minority
Shareholder Choices and Rights in the New Market
Environment', The IUP Journal of Corporate and
Securities Law, V:7.
- Leuz, Christian (2003), ‘Dhananjay Nanda
and Peter D Wysocki, 'Earnings Management and
Investor Protection: An International Comparison',
Journal of Financial Economics, V:69.
- Mayson, Stephen W& French Derek & Ryan
Christopher (2007), Mayson, French & Ryan On
Company Law, 24. Edition, Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
- Milman, David (2015), ‘Shareholder Law:
Recent Developments in Practice’ Company Law
Newsletter, V:378.
- Payne, Jennifer (2005), `Sections 459–461
Companies Act 1985 in Flux: The Future of
Shareholder Protection’, The Cambridge Law
Journal V:64.
- Pettet, Ben (2005), Company Law, 2.
Edition, London, Pearson Education Limited.
- Pulaşlı, Hasan (2018), Şirketler Hukuku
Şerhi, 3. Edition, Ankara, Adalet Press.
- Raja, Khurram Parvez (2012), ‘Corporate
Governance and Minority Shareholders' Rights and
Interests in Pakistan: A Case for Reform’
International Company and Commercial Law
Review, V:23, I:10.
- Reisberg, Arad (2007), Derivative Actions
and Corporate Governance, 2. Edition, Oxford
University Press, Oxford.
- Sarkar, Prabirjit (2017), `Common law vs.
Civil law: which system provides more protection to
shareholders and promotes financial
development?`, Journal of Advanced Research in
Law and Economics, V:2.
- Sharar, Zain (2010) 2Minority Shareholders'
Remedies in Public Shareholding Companies:
Comparing the State of Qatar and Australia2
Corporate Governance e-Journal, 3.
- Siems, Mathias M (2008), 'Shareholder
Protection around the World ('Leximetric II')',
University of Cambridge, CBR Working Paper,
V:359.
- Tan, Zhong Xing (2014), 'Unfair Prejudice
from Beyond, Beyond Unfair Prejudice: Amplifying
Minority Protection in Corporate Group
Structures', Journal of Corporate Law Studies, V:14.
- Tekinalp, Ünal (1974), ‘Türk Ticaret
Kanunundaki Boşluk: Anonim Ortaklığın Feshi,
Çoğunluk Gücünün Kötüye Kullanılmasına Karşı
Etkili Bir Araç’ İktisat ve Maliye Dergisi, V:21.
- Tekinalp, Ünal (2013), 'Anonim Ortaklıgın
Haklı Sebeplerle Feshi Davasının Bazı Usulî
Sorunları', Ersin Çamoglu'na Armağan, 1. Edition,
Vedat Press, İstanbul.
- Tuzcu, Arcan (2004), 'The Corporate
Governance Approach of Istanbul Stock Exchange
Companies' The Turkish Yearbook of International
Relations, V:35.
- Ulusoy, Erol (2016), Anonim Şirketlerde
Bireysel ve Azınlık Pay Sahibi Hakları, 2. Edition,
Bilge Press, İstanbul.
UK Cases
- 'Companies Register Activities 2017 To 2018'
(GOV.UK, 2018)
accessed 07/05/2020.
- Kirkpatrick, Grant (2009), 'The Corporate
Governance Lessons from the Financial Crisis'
(Oecd.org)
accessed 07 May 2020.
- Organisation for Economic Co- Operation
and Development (OECD), ‘OECD Principles of
Corporate Governance’ (2004)
http://www.oecd.org/
corporate/ca/corporategovernanceprinciples/31557
724.pdf. accessed 07/05/2020.
- Ungureanu, Mihaela (2012), 'Models and
Practices of Corporate Governance Worldwide'
(Ceswp.uaic.ro) accessed 07 May
2020.
- Uygur Ercan (2010), 'The Global Crisis and
the Turkish Economy' accessed 07
May 2020.
- World Bank Group (2014), 'Why It Matters'
accessed 07 May 2020.
- Law Commission, “Shareholder Remedies”
(Law Com. No 246, Cm. 3769, 1997).