Has your shareholding in a Turkish company been transferred without authorization? Learn how foreign investors can challenge unauthorized or fraudulent share transfers, correct corporate records, protect voting rights and seek compensation in Turkey.

A foreign investor may discover that shares in a Turkish company have allegedly been transferred without their knowledge or consent. Sometimes the problem appears when the investor checks corporate records and finds that another person is shown as a shareholder. In other cases, the investor learns that a business partner has relied on a disputed share transfer agreement, forged signature, improperly used power of attorney or questionable general assembly resolution to change the company’s ownership structure.

This can be one of the most serious forms of shareholder dispute because it may affect not only the economic value of the investment but also voting rights, dividend rights, management influence and control of the company.

An unauthorized share transfer should therefore be investigated immediately.

The legal response depends heavily on the type of Turkish company involved. The rules governing a limited liability company are materially different from those governing a joint-stock company. Turkey’s Ministry of Trade confirms that limited-company transfers involve mandatory formal steps, while share transfers in joint-stock companies generally operate under a substantially more flexible regime. (https://ticaret.gov.tr)

For a foreign investor, the first question should not simply be:

“Who is currently shown as the shareholder?”

The more important questions are:

Was there a legally valid transfer? Who allegedly signed it? Were mandatory formalities completed? Was corporate approval required? Was a power of attorney used? Were company records changed on the basis of false or unauthorized documents?

The answers determine which legal remedies may be available.

What Is an Unauthorized Share Transfer?

An unauthorized share transfer can arise in several different ways.

A business partner may claim that the foreign investor voluntarily sold their shares even though no genuine agreement was reached. A signature on the transfer documentation may be disputed. A representative may allegedly have exceeded the authority contained in a power of attorney. Corporate approval may have been fabricated or improperly obtained. The company may have altered its internal shareholder records based on documents whose validity is disputed.

These situations should not be treated as identical.

A defective corporate procedure is different from document forgery.

An unauthorized act by a representative is different from a genuine agreement that one party later regrets.

The legal strategy should identify exactly which element of the purported transfer is invalid.

First Determine the Type of Turkish Company

This is essential.

The Ministry of Trade’s current foreign-investor guide expressly distinguishes the two principal capital-company structures. For limited liability companies, the Ministry identifies a notarized share-transfer agreement, general assembly approval unless the articles provide otherwise, and registration/publication of the transfer as the relevant transfer process. By contrast, joint-stock-company shares are generally transferable without registration and publication of the transfer itself, subject to the applicable rules and exceptions. (https://ticaret.gov.tr)

A foreign investor should therefore avoid applying limited-company rules to a joint-stock company or vice versa.

Unauthorized Share Transfer in a Limited Liability Company

Limited liability company transfers are subject to particularly important formal requirements.

Article 595 of the Turkish Commercial Code provides that a transfer of a capital share, as well as the transaction creating the obligation to transfer it, must be made in writing and the parties’ signatures must be notarized.

This immediately creates several important questions in an unauthorized-transfer dispute.

Was there a written transfer agreement?

Does it contain the foreign shareholder’s signature?

Was that signature genuinely made by the investor?

Was the signature notarized as required?

Did someone sign through a representative?

If so, did that person actually possess authority to execute the transaction?

These documents should be obtained immediately.

Is General Assembly Approval Required?

As a general rule, yes, unless the company’s articles provide otherwise.

Article 595 states that unless otherwise provided in the company’s articles, general assembly approval is required for the transfer and the transfer becomes valid with that approval.

This makes the company’s articles of association extremely important.

Do not assume that a document labeled “share transfer agreement” by itself necessarily establishes a valid completed transfer.

The corporate approval requirements must also be examined.

Can the Articles of Association Change the Rules?

Yes.

Article 595 allows the company’s articles to regulate aspects of the approval requirement and even permits the articles to prohibit transfers.

Therefore, one of the first documents counsel should obtain is the version of the articles applicable on the date of the alleged transaction.

The current articles alone may not always answer the question if amendments occurred after the disputed event.

What If General Assembly Approval Was Fabricated?

This can transform the case.

Suppose the local business partner produces a general assembly resolution stating that the transfer was approved.

The foreign shareholder says no such meeting occurred.

The underlying corporate documents should be examined immediately.

The investor should determine when the meeting allegedly occurred, who attended, who signed the minutes, what voting percentages were recorded and whether the meeting documentation corresponds with other available evidence.

If signatures or corporate records were falsified, the dispute may involve both corporate-law remedies and potential criminal-law consequences.

What If the Foreign Investor’s Signature Was Forged?

A disputed signature should be treated as an evidence-preservation issue immediately.

Obtain copies of every document allegedly signed by the investor.

Identify where the originals are located.

Preserve genuine comparison signatures from appropriate periods.

Do not alter or annotate original documents.

Forensic examination may ultimately become necessary.

The investor should also determine whether the disputed document was submitted to a notary, company body, trade registry, bank or another institution.

The complete documentary chain can be as important as the signature itself.

What If a Power of Attorney Was Used?

Foreign investors frequently provide powers of attorney because they cannot remain physically present in Turkey.

That creates a separate issue.

A signature may genuinely belong to the representative while the investor argues that the representative had no authority to sell or transfer the shares.

The power of attorney must therefore be examined carefully.

The analysis should determine exactly what authority was granted, whether the authority was still effective on the transaction date and whether the disputed transaction fell within its scope.

Do not assume that a general authorization concerning company matters automatically permits every possible disposition of an investor’s shares.

What If the Power of Attorney Had Already Been Revoked?

Timing becomes crucial.

The revocation document, notification history and transaction date should be compared.

The investor should determine when the representative learned of the revocation and whether relevant third parties had notice.

Past transactions cannot automatically be undone merely by subsequently revoking authority.

The validity and effects of the particular transaction require separate analysis.

Registration of Limited Company Share Transfers

Article 598 provides that company managers apply to the trade registry for registration of transfers of capital shares. It also contains additional rules concerning situations in which the application is not made within thirty days.

Registration records therefore become important evidence in an unauthorized-transfer dispute.

The investor should determine:

when the registration occurred, who submitted the application, which documents supported it and which corporate decisions were relied upon.

The Ministry of Trade’s current guide likewise describes registration and publication as part of the limited-company share-transfer process. (https://ticaret.gov.tr)

Does Registration Automatically Prove the Transfer Was Valid?

Not necessarily.

Registration is highly important, but the underlying legal transaction and supporting documentation must still be examined.

Article 598 also expressly protects reliance by a good-faith person on the registry record.

That means third-party good-faith issues can materially complicate the dispute.

The longer an allegedly unauthorized corporate status remains unchallenged and generates further transactions, the more complicated the factual and legal position can become.

Rapid action is therefore important.

Check MERSIS Immediately

MERSIS can help investors identify registered corporate information and changes.

The Ministry of Trade explains that its company-query functionality allows persons to view companies in which they are shown as a shareholder, owner or authorized person and provides a means of checking registration-related transactions such as share transfers. (https://ticaret.gov.tr)

A foreign investor who discovers an unexpected ownership change should preserve available records showing the current and, where obtainable, previous corporate position.

However, MERSIS information should be treated as part of the evidence rather than the entire legal analysis.

Unauthorized Transfer in a Joint-Stock Company

Joint-stock companies require a different approach.

The Ministry of Trade’s foreign-investor guide states that share transfers in joint-stock companies are generally not subject to registration and publication and explains the transfer mechanisms applicable to registered and bearer shares. (https://ticaret.gov.tr)

Therefore, searching only the trade registry may not reveal everything necessary to determine ownership.

The share type must first be identified.

Registered Shares

Article 490 establishes the general principle that registered shares are freely transferable unless legislation or the articles provide otherwise. Where represented by registered share certificates, transfer through a legal transaction can occur through endorsement and delivery of possession.

This means a foreign shareholder alleging an unauthorized transfer should investigate the physical and documentary history of the relevant share certificates.

Where are the originals?

Were they endorsed?

Who allegedly endorsed them?

Who received possession?

Are the signatures genuine?

What does the company’s share ledger show?

These questions can become central to the dispute.

Can the Articles Restrict Transfer of Registered Shares?

Yes.

Article 492 allows the articles to provide that registered shares may be transferred only with company approval.

Article 493 then regulates grounds on which a non-listed company may refuse approval, including important reasons stated in the articles or an offer to purchase the shares at their real value under the statutory mechanism. (WIPO)

The articles must therefore be reviewed even where the shares appear generally transferable.

Unpaid Registered Shares

Article 491 contains another important exception.

Registered shares whose consideration has not been fully paid generally require company approval for transfer, subject to statutory exceptions such as inheritance and enforcement-related acquisition.

Whether the shares were fully paid can therefore affect the transfer analysis.

Bearer Shares Require Separate Attention

Bearer shares operate under a different statutory framework.

The current Commercial Code provides rules concerning transfer through possession and the notification framework involving the Central Securities Depository.

The Commercial Code also states that, for rights attached to bearer share certificates to be asserted against the company and third parties, the notification date to the Central Securities Depository is relevant. (Aydın Ticaret Müdürlüğü)

Accordingly, a dispute involving bearer shares should not be analyzed in the same way as a dispute concerning registered shares.

Check the Share Ledger

The share ledger can be particularly important.

For limited liability companies, the Commercial Code provides that shareholders may inspect the share ledger. (Kayseri Ticaret Müdürlüğü)

In a broader ownership dispute, the investor should obtain and preserve the relevant ledger entries and determine when any changes were made.

The investor should also compare those entries against transfer agreements, corporate decisions and registry information.

A discrepancy between documents can become important evidence.

What If the Local Partner Simply Changed the Share Ledger?

An internal record should not be accepted unquestioningly as proof that a valid underlying transaction occurred.

Ask what legal event supposedly justified the change.

If management says:

“You transferred your shares six months ago.”

request the transfer instrument.

If they say the transfer occurred through a representative, obtain the power of attorney.

If they rely on a general assembly resolution, obtain the resolution and meeting documentation.

If they rely on endorsed share certificates, examine the certificates.

The legal basis should be traceable.

What If No Purchase Price Was Ever Paid?

Failure to receive the expected purchase price can be important, but it does not automatically mean the transfer never occurred.

There is a distinction between the validity of the transfer and breach of the purchaser’s payment obligation.

A seller may have validly transferred shares but remain unpaid.

Alternatively, absence of payment may support a broader factual allegation that the purported transaction never genuinely occurred.

The contract and transfer mechanism must be analyzed before selecting the remedy.

What If the Purchase Price Was Artificially Low?

A low price alone does not automatically invalidate a voluntary share sale.

But the circumstances should be investigated where the transaction allegedly resulted from deception, abuse of authority, conflict of interest or another legally significant defect.

This is particularly important where a representative allegedly sold the investor’s shares to themselves, a relative or an affiliated company.

What If the Transfer Agreement Was Signed Under Deception?

The investor should preserve all communications leading to execution.

Emails, messages, draft agreements, translations and explanations provided before signature may become important.

A foreign shareholder may allege that they were told a document had one purpose when it actually transferred ownership.

Such a claim is heavily evidence-dependent.

The investor should not rely solely on saying:

“I did not understand what I signed.”

The circumstances surrounding execution must be reconstructed.

What If the Investor Signed a Document in a Language They Did Not Understand?

This does not automatically invalidate the transaction.

However, the circumstances can matter significantly where fraud, misrepresentation or another defect in consent is alleged.

The investor should preserve the document, translations provided at the time, correspondence concerning its purpose and information about who was present during execution.

Where notarization occurred, the notarial records may also become relevant.

What If the Share Transfer Was Based on a Fake General Assembly?

Obtain the alleged minutes immediately.

Compare them with travel records, communications, corporate notices and other evidence showing whether the shareholder participated.

For example, if corporate records claim that a foreign shareholder physically attended a meeting in Turkey on a date when reliable evidence establishes that the person was elsewhere, that inconsistency may be highly significant.

The entire corporate record should be preserved.

What If a Fake Signature Was Used Before a Notary?

This requires careful investigation rather than assumptions about how the document was created.

The relevant notarial transaction and supporting records should be identified.

The investor should establish whether the document purports to have been signed personally or through a representative.

Identity information, transaction records and original documents may become important evidence.

Where forgery is genuinely suspected, criminal proceedings may also need to be considered.

Can the Foreign Investor Challenge the Transfer in Court?

Potentially, yes.

The correct action depends on what is allegedly defective.

The dispute might concern validity of the underlying transfer agreement, authority of the representative, corporate approval, shareholder status, registry consequences or another issue.

A single standardized “share transfer cancellation lawsuit” should not be assumed to fit every case.

The factual mechanism of the alleged transfer must first be identified.

Which Court Handles the Dispute?

Corporate share-transfer disputes commonly require assessment before the competent commercial court, but jurisdiction and venue depend on the nature of the claim, parties and requested relief.

The company’s registered headquarters, contractual jurisdiction clauses and precise cause of action may all require examination.

The appropriate court should therefore be identified after the transaction documents have been reviewed.

Can the Trade Registry Record Be Corrected?

Where a limited-company ownership record is based on an allegedly invalid transaction, the consequences for the trade registry must be addressed as part of the legal strategy.

But registry correction should not be approached independently from the underlying legal dispute.

The investor may first need to establish that the transaction on which the registration was based was invalid or otherwise legally ineffective.

The exact remedy depends on how the incorrect record arose.

Can an Emergency Injunction Be Requested?

Potentially, and this can be one of the most important aspects of the case.

Imagine that an unauthorized transfer has allegedly changed the foreign investor’s shareholding from 50% to zero.

The purported new shareholder then plans to vote at an imminent general assembly to change management, sell company assets or restructure the business.

Waiting for a final judgment on ownership could allow irreversible corporate consequences to occur.

Where procedural requirements are satisfied, interim judicial protection should therefore be evaluated immediately.

Can Voting Rights Be Protected While the Case Is Pending?

Potentially, depending on the factual and procedural circumstances.

The requested interim protection should be carefully tailored to the disputed rights and threatened harm.

The court will require a legal and evidentiary basis rather than a general allegation that the transfer was unauthorized.

The investor should therefore present the documentary chain showing why the purported transfer is disputed.

What If the New Shareholder Tries to Sell the Shares Again?

This significantly increases urgency.

A second transfer may introduce third parties and good-faith issues into an already complicated dispute.

Article 598 expressly recognizes protection of a good-faith person relying on the registry in the limited-company context.

Accordingly, foreign investors should not assume they can simply wait until the commercial dispute resolves itself.

Where further transfer is genuinely threatened, urgent protective remedies should be considered.

What If Company Assets Are Being Sold After the Share Transfer?

The ownership dispute and asset-protection problem may need to be handled simultaneously.

Suppose a foreign investor’s 50% interest is allegedly transferred without authorization.

The new ownership structure then approves the sale of the company’s principal property.

Even if the investor later succeeds in challenging the share transfer, recovery may become substantially more difficult if important assets have already moved to third parties.

Emergency strategy should therefore consider both share ownership and preservation of company value.

What If Management Was Changed Immediately After the Transfer?

Obtain all corporate resolutions.

Determine whether the purported new shareholder participated in votes appointing or removing directors or managers.

If the underlying share transfer is disputed, subsequent corporate decisions may also require legal examination.

Do not analyze each event in isolation.

A chronological reconstruction can reveal that the transfer was only the first step in a broader attempt to obtain control.

Build a Transaction Timeline

Foreign investors should prepare a precise chronology.

Identify the last date on which ownership was undisputed.

Record when the alleged transfer agreement was supposedly signed.

Identify the date of any notarization, corporate approval, registry application, ledger change and subsequent general assembly.

Record when the foreign shareholder first learned of the transaction.

This chronology can become critical for evidence, procedural deadlines and emergency relief.

Preserve Digital Evidence

Keep original emails, messaging histories, attachments and electronic contracts.

Do not rely only on screenshots if original electronic records remain available.

Preserve messages concerning proposed investments, negotiations, powers of attorney, share prices and corporate meetings.

Digital evidence may help establish whether a share sale was ever genuinely discussed.

Do Not Sign “Corrective” Documents Without Review

After discovering a problem, the local partner may say:

“There was only an administrative mistake. Sign this document and we will fix it.”

Do not sign new transfer agreements, waivers, settlement documents, retroactive resolutions or acknowledgments before understanding their legal effect.

A document presented as a correction could potentially confirm the very transaction the investor intends to challenge.

What If the Business Partner Offers to Return the Shares?

Settlement can sometimes be commercially sensible.

However, simply transferring shares back may not resolve all consequences of the unauthorized transaction.

The investor should examine whether dividends were distributed, assets sold, management changed, liabilities created or company value reduced during the disputed period.

Restoring nominal ownership may not compensate for losses suffered in the meantime.

Can Compensation Be Claimed?

Potentially, where the legal requirements for liability and damages are established.

The investor should identify who caused the damage and whether the loss was suffered directly by the shareholder or by the company.

This distinction matters.

For example, company assets sold after an unauthorized ownership change may primarily create company loss, while other consequences may potentially constitute direct shareholder damage.

The appropriate claimant and damages theory must be determined carefully.

What If the Directors Participated in the Unauthorized Transfer?

Director or manager liability may require separate consideration.

If corporate managers knowingly implemented invalid documents, manipulated company records or facilitated transactions contrary to their duties, their potential liability should be assessed independently from the validity of the share transfer itself.

Invalidating the transfer does not automatically resolve losses caused by management conduct.

Can Criminal Proceedings Be Started?

Potentially, where independently criminal conduct is supported by evidence.

An ordinary disagreement over whether a share transfer contract was properly performed should not automatically be converted into a criminal complaint.

The situation is different where there is credible evidence of forged signatures, fabricated documents, fraudulent deception or other independently criminal conduct.

The criminal allegation should identify specific acts, documents and individuals.

Criminal Proceedings Do Not Automatically Restore the Shares

This is an important distinction.

A criminal investigation can determine whether criminal conduct occurred.

Corporate and civil proceedings address ownership, validity of transactions, correction of records and compensation.

A foreign investor should not assume that filing a criminal complaint alone will automatically restore shareholder status.

Parallel proceedings may be necessary depending on the facts.

What If the Investor’s Entire Shareholding Has Disappeared?

Treat the matter as urgent.

Verify the company’s current ownership and management information.

Obtain the alleged transfer documentation.

Identify whether further corporate transactions are pending.

Preserve evidence of the investor’s original acquisition and ownership.

Assess whether interim judicial protection is necessary.

The first objective is to prevent an allegedly unauthorized ownership change from generating additional irreversible transactions.

What If Only Part of the Shares Was Transferred?

The same analysis applies.

A partial transfer can still alter corporate control.

For example, reducing a foreign shareholder from 50% to 40% may give another shareholder effective majority control.

That change can influence management appointments, general assembly resolutions and future transactions.

Economic significance should therefore be assessed alongside the number of shares transferred.

What If the Transfer Created a New Majority Shareholder?

This is particularly dangerous.

An unauthorized transfer can change not merely ownership percentages but the entire governance structure.

The new majority may attempt to replace management, approve transactions, amend corporate arrangements or distribute profits.

Emergency relief should therefore consider what the purported new majority is likely to do before the ownership dispute is resolved.

Foreign Investment Status Does Not Prevent Legal Protection

Foreign shareholders are entitled to participate in Turkish companies under the applicable investment and company-law framework.

The Ministry of Trade’s current guide expressly recognizes that foreign investors may invest by acquiring shares in companies established in Turkey and may later transfer those shares. (https://ticaret.gov.tr)

The fact that the investor resides outside Turkey does not make an allegedly unauthorized transfer immune from challenge.

Can the Investor Act Through a Lawyer in Turkey?

Potentially, with appropriate authorization.

This is especially useful where the investor is abroad and urgent corporate or judicial action is required.

The power of attorney should be prepared carefully for the contemplated proceedings and transactions.

Where the dispute itself concerns misuse of a previous power of attorney, the new authorization should be kept clearly separate from the disputed instrument.

Practical Example: Foreign 50% Shareholder Suddenly Removed

Consider a foreign investor holding 50% of a Turkish limited liability company.

The other 50% shareholder manages the business locally.

The foreign investor later discovers that corporate records now show the local partner holding 100%.

The local partner claims that the investor sold their shares six months earlier.

The foreign investor denies signing any share transfer agreement.

The immediate investigation should obtain the alleged written agreement, notarial documentation, general assembly approval and trade registry documents.

Article 595 requires the limited-company transfer agreement to be in writing with notarized signatures and, unless the articles provide otherwise, requires general assembly approval for validity.

If the purported investor signature is disputed, the original documentation should be preserved for examination.

The investor should then determine whether the alleged ownership change has already been used to change management, sell assets or approve other transactions.

If further harmful corporate action is imminent, waiting for a final ownership judgment may be commercially dangerous.

The strategy may therefore require simultaneous action concerning transfer validity, interim protection, corporate decisions, evidence preservation and potential liability.

Emergency Action Plan for Foreign Investors

A foreign shareholder discovering an allegedly unauthorized transfer should first verify the current corporate position and preserve evidence of the original shareholding. The company’s articles, share ledger, relevant registry records, share certificates where applicable, shareholder agreement and previous corporate resolutions should be secured.

Next, obtain every document allegedly supporting the transfer. In a limited liability company, particular attention should be given to the written notarized transfer instrument, required corporate approval and subsequent registration process.

For a joint-stock company, identify whether the shares are registered or bearer shares and reconstruct the applicable transfer mechanism. Registered shares are generally transferable under Article 490, while the articles may impose approval restrictions under Article 492. (Aydın Ticaret Müdürlüğü)

If a signature is disputed, original documents and comparison materials should be preserved immediately.

If a representative acted, the power of attorney should be analyzed transaction by transaction.

Finally, determine what has happened after the alleged transfer. Changes in management, asset sales, further share transfers, dividend decisions and other corporate actions may require urgent intervention before the ownership dispute is finally resolved.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a foreign investor challenge an unauthorized share transfer in Turkey?

Potentially, yes. The available remedy depends on the company type, transfer mechanism and alleged defect, such as lack of required form, absence of approval, lack of authority, disputed signature or another defect affecting the transaction.

Does a limited company share transfer require notarization?

Article 595 requires the transfer and the transaction creating the transfer obligation to be made in writing and the parties’ signatures to be notarized.

Does a limited company share transfer require shareholder approval?

Unless the company’s articles provide otherwise, Article 595 requires general assembly approval, and the transfer becomes valid with that approval.

Is a joint-stock company share transfer subject to the same rules?

No. Joint-stock-company transfers operate under different rules. The Ministry of Trade confirms that such transfers generally are not subject to registration and publication, while the applicable transfer mechanism depends on the shares involved. (https://ticaret.gov.tr)

Can registered shares in a joint-stock company be freely transferred?

As a general rule, Article 490 provides that registered shares are transferable unless legislation or the articles provide otherwise. The articles may require company approval under Article 492.

What should I do if my signature was forged?

Secure the disputed documents immediately, identify the originals, preserve genuine comparison signatures and investigate how the documents were created and used. Corporate, civil and potentially criminal remedies may all require consideration.

What if my business partner used my power of attorney?

The exact wording and scope of the authorization must be reviewed. The fact that a person possessed a power of attorney does not answer whether that power authorized the specific disputed share transaction.

Can I stop the shares from being transferred again?

Potentially, where the legal requirements for interim judicial protection are satisfied. Urgent assessment is particularly important because subsequent transfers can introduce additional third-party and good-faith issues.

Can I recover compensation after an unauthorized share transfer?

Potentially. The investor must establish the legal basis for liability, the responsible persons, damage and causation. Company loss and direct shareholder loss should be distinguished.

Can I file a criminal complaint?

Potentially where evidence supports independently criminal conduct, such as alleged document forgery or fraudulent deception. A contractual or corporate disagreement alone should not automatically be characterized as criminal.

Client-Focused Legal Support for Foreign Investors

An unauthorized share transfer can threaten the entire value and control structure of a foreign investment in Turkey. The most important first step is to establish what transfer supposedly occurred, which documents were used, whether mandatory formalities were satisfied and who currently exercises the rights attached to the shares.

Limited liability company disputes require particular attention to Article 595. The Commercial Code requires a written transfer arrangement with notarized signatures and, unless the articles provide otherwise, general assembly approval. Article 598 separately regulates registration of the transfer.

Joint-stock companies require a different analysis. Registered shares are generally transferable under Article 490, while Article 492 allows the articles to make transfers subject to company approval. The Ministry of Trade also confirms that joint-stock-company share transfers generally are not subject to trade-registry registration and publication. (Aydın Ticaret Müdürlüğü)

Where the foreign investor disputes their signature, alleges misuse of a power of attorney or discovers that the purported transfer has already been used to change management or dispose of company assets, immediate action can be critical. Challenging the transfer, preserving evidence, protecting voting rights, seeking interim judicial measures, challenging subsequent corporate decisions and pursuing compensation may need to be coordinated.

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign shareholders, investors and international businesses with unauthorized share transfers, fraudulent share transfers, disputed shareholder status, forged corporate documents, misuse of powers of attorney, shareholder disputes, minority shareholder protection, corporate-control disputes, interim protection and corporate litigation in Turkey.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No: 221, Yıldırım Tower, Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey