NEWSLETTER-2019-metin

23 COMMERCIAL LAW this view, there is, and there should be, no difference for the claim- ant between leaving the company through taking the real value of its shares and termination of the company 14 . As a counter-view, one might argue that the discretionary power of the judge is not open-ended, and an exceptional provision included in one Article cannot be extended to apply to another Article by way of analogy. Conclusion Article 530 of the TCC provides for a joint stock company’s shareholders and creditors, as well as the Ministry of Trade, to file a lawsuit for the termination of the company where, for a lengthy period of time, one of the company bodies that is mandatory by law does not exist, or where the general assembly fails to convene. The commer- cial court of first instance located in the place wherein the company headquarters is situated shall listen to the board of directors of the company, and determine a convenient period of time for the company to bring its situation to be in compliance with the law, and if the situa- tion is not remedied within such period, shall rule for the termination of the company. It is mandatory for the acceptance of the case that the situations foreseen under the Article have continued for a lengthy period of time, and the judge should act freely in determination of such period according to the conditions of the case at hand. Whether or not a judgment could be made pursuant to Article 531 of the TCC in a case that is filed based on the provisions of Article 530 of the TCC shall be determined by judicial decisions. 14 Ayoğlu , p. 230-231.