

What can foreign investors do if a Turkish business partner secretly sells company property? Learn how to challenge unauthorized asset sales, protect sale proceeds, investigate related-party transfers and pursue manager liability in Turkey.
A foreign investor who discovers that a Turkish business partner has secretly sold company property should act immediately.
The dispute is not necessarily limited to whether the sale was “authorized.” The investor should determine:
Who legally owned the property?
Who had authority to sell it?
Was corporate approval required?
Who purchased it?
Was the price commercially reasonable?
Where did the sale proceeds go?
Can the property or proceeds still be protected?
The answers can determine whether the appropriate response involves a corporate challenge, interim judicial protection, recovery of sale proceeds, director or manager liability, or—where supported by the facts—a separate criminal-law investigation.
Begin with ownership.
The asset may be:
A shareholder does not personally own individual company assets merely because they own shares in the company.
This distinction is fundamental.
Request and preserve:
Do not rely only on what the Turkish partner says occurred.
Reconstruct the transaction independently.
Check:
A manager’s general representation authority does not necessarily mean that every disposal of company property is internally permissible.
For joint stock companies, Article 408 of the Turkish Commercial Code lists the wholesale sale of a significant amount of company assets among the general assembly’s non-transferable powers.
This can become particularly important where the Turkish business partner has attempted to dispose of a substantial part of the company’s economic assets without involving the shareholders.
However, whether a particular transaction falls within this rule depends on its actual characteristics.
The Constitutional Court considered Article 408/2(f) in a decision dated May 13, 2026 concerning the rule assigning the wholesale sale of a significant amount of company assets to the general assembly.
The underlying proceedings involved a title cancellation and registration dispute, demonstrating how questions concerning corporate authorization can directly intersect with disputes over property transfers.
Accordingly, foreign investors dealing with a major asset sale should not analyze the transaction solely as an ordinary management decision.
Consider its economic significance.
For example:
Total company assets: TRY 120 million
Factory sold: TRY 75 million
This transaction is fundamentally different from selling an old company vehicle worth TRY 500,000.
Relevant considerations can include:
This should receive immediate attention.
If the property is indispensable to the company’s business, the sale may effectively transform or disable the enterprise.
Obtain:
The economic significance of the property should be documented.
Compare:
Actual sale price
with
Reasonable market value at the transaction date.
For example:
Estimated market value: TRY 80 million
Sale price: TRY 32 million
A large difference does not automatically establish wrongdoing, but it requires explanation.
Where real estate or another major asset is involved, consider obtaining an independent historical valuation addressing the property’s value around the sale date.
This can become important when calculating company loss.
Determine whether the buyer is:
Related-party transactions require particularly careful investigation.
Create an ownership map.
For example:
Company A: Foreign investor + Turkish partner
Company B: 100% controlled by Turkish partner
Company A factory → Company B
Then investigate:
The relationship between seller management and buyer can be highly relevant.
Family relationship alone does not invalidate a sale.
However, investigate:
A supposedly independent sale may require closer scrutiny where the buyer is closely connected with management.
This is one of the most important steps.
Determine:
Property → buyer → purchase price → receiving bank account → subsequent transfers
Ask:
Even where reversing the property transaction becomes difficult, protecting identifiable sale proceeds may remain important.
This should be investigated urgently.
Company property should not ordinarily result in sale proceeds becoming the personal property of a shareholder or manager without a legitimate legal basis.
Preserve:
Create a payment reconciliation:
Contract price: TRY 50 million
Company received: TRY 20 million
Unexplained balance: TRY 30 million
The missing amount may become central to recovery and management-liability claims.
Determine how the disposal was recorded.
Check:
The accounting record should correspond with the actual transaction.
Obtain statements covering:
This can show whether proceeds were immediately transferred elsewhere.
Preserve evidence showing when the investor discovered the transaction.
For example:
Concealment may be relevant to the overall assessment of management conduct.
A shareholders’ agreement may classify asset disposals as a reserved matter.
For example:
Sale of assets exceeding TRY 5 million requires approval of both shareholders.
A sale completed without that approval may create contractual consequences even where the person signing the transaction possessed external representation authority.
This distinction is essential.
A manager may breach internal corporate rules without automatically producing the same legal consequence against every third-party purchaser.
The analysis should therefore separate:
Do not assume that every unauthorized internal act automatically makes the external sale void.
Potentially, depending on the legal defect and circumstances of the transaction.
Relevant questions include:
The remedy must be tailored to the specific transaction.
This can materially improve the investor’s position.
If there is evidence that a sale agreement has been signed but ownership transfer is still pending, urgent interim protection may need to be considered.
Speed becomes critical.
Where there is a concrete risk of an imminent transfer or subsequent resale, appropriate interim judicial measures may be considered under the applicable conditions.
The investor should present specific evidence such as:
General suspicion is substantially weaker than transaction-specific evidence.
This can significantly increase complexity.
The investor should urgently determine:
Once additional third parties become involved, recovery can become more difficult.
Potentially.
Sometimes protecting identifiable proceeds is more commercially realistic than attempting to reverse a completed transaction.
The appropriate remedy depends on:
Where the investor or company has a qualifying monetary claim, precautionary attachment may potentially become relevant.
For example, if a manager received company sale proceeds personally and a repayment or damages claim can be established, protecting recoverable assets may become important before final judgment.
This is critical.
If the property belonged to the company and the company suffered the loss, the primary damage may belong to the company.
The foreign shareholder should not automatically calculate:
Company loss × ownership percentage = personal claim.
Turkish company law distinguishes company damage from direct shareholder damage.
Article 553 of the Turkish Commercial Code provides that directors, managers and other specified corporate actors may be liable where they culpably breach duties arising from legislation or the articles and cause damage to the company, shareholders or creditors.
An unauthorized disposal causing company loss may therefore require a management-liability analysis.
Assume:
Fair property value: TRY 60 million
Sale price: TRY 30 million
Buyer: Company controlled by manager
Amount actually received: TRY 20 million
Potential issues include:
Each component should be separately documented.
Turkish company law provides mechanisms through which shareholders may pursue compensation relating to damage suffered by the company, subject to the applicable statutory requirements.
Where the claim concerns company damage, the recovery structure must respect the distinction between company assets and the shareholder’s personal assets.
This issue should be determined before proceedings are filed.
A secret property sale may indicate a wider governance problem.
Immediately check:
Do not investigate only the asset already sold.
Create a 12–24 month transaction history.
Look for:
One secret sale may be part of a broader pattern.
A manager may extract value not only by selling property but also by burdening the company with debt.
Review:
The company’s financial exposure may be larger than the value of the property sold.
Potentially, depending on company type, ownership structure and circumstances.
If the same manager retains authority to dispose of additional company assets, the investor should consider whether management or representation authority can be lawfully removed or restricted.
Stopping future transactions may be as important as challenging the completed sale.
Majority ownership may provide significant governance power.
However, the investor must still follow:
Do not respond to an unauthorized transaction with another defective corporate act.
A 50/50 company creates additional difficulty.
Neither shareholder may be able to resolve management problems internally.
The investor may therefore need to combine:
Request evidence.
For example:
A commercially necessary sale is different from asset diversion.
The question is whether management acted consistently with its duties and applicable corporate procedures.
Market value does not automatically resolve the issue.
Even a fairly priced sale may still raise questions concerning:
Price is only one part of the analysis.
The buyer’s legal position can materially affect available remedies.
The investigation should determine:
Do not automatically accuse an independent purchaser of participating in misconduct.
A purported sale with no genuine payment or commercial purpose requires a different analysis.
Evidence may include:
The economic reality of the transaction should be established.
Potentially, if the evidence indicates conduct that may constitute a criminal offence.
However, an unauthorized corporate transaction does not automatically amount to criminal conduct.
Corporate-law, compensation and criminal-law issues should be analyzed separately.
A strong case should be built around evidence:
Property → authority → sale → buyer → price → payment → company loss
If that evidence also establishes grounds for criminal investigation, the criminal-law route can be assessed independently.
The company’s losses may extend beyond the sale price.
For example, selling essential machinery could cause:
Preserve evidence of these consequences.
After selling a major company asset, the Turkish partner may offer to purchase the foreign investor’s shares.
Before agreeing, determine:
Otherwise, the investor may sell shares at a value already depressed by the disputed conduct.
Where substantial assets are involved, review:
Asset register → sale agreement → invoice → buyer payment → bank receipt → accounting → subsequent transfer
This provides a complete transaction trail.
Preserve lawful access to:
Records may become harder to obtain after litigation begins.
A foreign investor discovering a secret company-property sale should:
It depends on the company’s legal form, management authority, articles, shareholders’ agreement and nature of the asset. A lack of notice alone does not determine validity, but significant asset sales may involve corporate approval requirements.
For joint stock companies, Article 408 expressly lists the wholesale sale of a significant amount of company assets among the general assembly’s non-transferable powers.
Potentially, depending on the defect in the transaction, the buyer’s legal position, registration and other circumstances.
The relationship, valuation, approval, payment and commercial purpose should be investigated carefully.
An independent historical valuation may help establish whether the company suffered measurable loss.
Potentially, if the requirements for an appropriate provisional measure are satisfied and a legally cognizable claim exists against the relevant person.
Potentially. Article 553 establishes a liability framework where directors or managers culpably breach statutory or corporate duties and cause damage.
Not automatically. If the property belonged to the company, the immediate damage may belong to the company rather than directly to the shareholder.
Not automatically. The transaction should first be reconstructed. Criminal proceedings may be considered where the evidence supports suspected criminal conduct.
Determine whether the property has already been legally transferred and where the purchase price went. If the transfer or movement of the proceeds is still ongoing, urgent protective measures may be significantly more effective.
A secret sale of company property can rapidly become a broader corporate-control and asset-recovery dispute.
The strongest response usually involves verifying authority, obtaining the transaction documents, determining whether corporate approval was required, investigating the buyer, comparing the sale price with market value and tracing every part of the purchase price.
Where the transaction has caused company loss, management-liability claims may also arise under the Turkish Commercial Code.
If further assets or sale proceeds remain at risk, the investor should also assess whether proportionate interim judicial protection is available rather than waiting for the final resolution of the shareholder dispute.
Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign shareholders, international investors and foreign-owned companies with unauthorized company asset sales, related-party transactions, manager misconduct, corporate-control disputes and recovery of company property or financial losses in Turkey.
Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance in investigating disputed asset sales, tracing proceeds, protecting remaining company assets and coordinating corporate, compensation and appropriate protective proceedings.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Office No:148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey
This article is intended for general information and does not constitute legal advice. The consequences of a company asset sale depend on the company’s legal form, nature and importance of the property, representation authority, required corporate approvals, buyer’s position, payment of the purchase price and specific circumstances of the transaction.