Every venture term sheet promises the investor “information rights”: monthly management accounts, annual audited financials, budget and board packs. Founders read this as a negotiated concession. It is, in fact, a contractual layer on top of a statutory floor that every shareholder in a Turkish joint-stock company already has, that the articles cannot remove, and that ends, when the company refuses, in a fast-track court application and potentially a court-appointed special auditor. Articles 437 to 444 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 (TCC) are the floor. They matter to founders because a disgruntled angel with one share can use them; they matter to investors because their contractual information rights are enforced by damages while the statutory ones are enforced by a court order within weeks; and they matter to both in a dispute, because the special audit is the minority’s main tool for turning suspicion into evidence. This article explains the document-access right before the meeting, the right to ask questions at it, the two grounds for refusal, the ten-day court route, the request for a special audit and the ten per cent route when the majority refuses, how the auditor works and what happens to the report, and how the statutory floor and the shareholders’ agreement fit together. It follows our articles on minority rights and investor rights in a term sheet.
Before the meeting: fifteen days of document access
Article 437(1) requires the financial statements, consolidated statements, the board’s annual report, the auditors’ reports and the board’s dividend proposal to be made available for shareholders’ inspection at the company’s seat and branches at least fifteen days before the general assembly; the financial statements remain available for one year; and every shareholder may request a copy of the income statement and balance sheet at the company’s expense. Article 437(2) gives the shareholder the right, at the general assembly, to request information from the board about the company’s affairs and from the auditors about the manner and results of the audit, extending to subsidiaries within the meaning of Article 200; the information must be careful and accurate, in keeping with accountability and honesty; and where information has been given to one shareholder in that capacity outside the meeting, another shareholder may demand the same information in the same scope and detail, whether or not on the agenda, and the board may not then invoke the trade-secret defence. That last sentence is the one investors should read twice: a monthly reporting pack given to the lead investor under the shareholders’ agreement is information given to a shareholder in that capacity, and Article 437(2) entitles every other shareholder who asks at the general assembly to the same pack. Companies that want to keep investor reporting confidential from small shareholders route it to the investor’s board nominee, who receives it as a director under Article 392, rather than to the investor as shareholder.
The two grounds for refusal, and inspection of the books
Article 437(3) allows the company to refuse information only where giving it would disclose company secrets or endanger other company interests worthy of protection. The refusal must be reasoned and proportionate; “commercially sensitive” is a description, not a ground, and the board must show why disclosure to a shareholder bound by duties of loyalty would harm the company. Article 437(4) governs inspection: examining the company’s books and correspondence, in the parts relevant to the shareholder’s question, requires the express permission of the general assembly or a board resolution, and where permission is given the inspection may be carried out through an expert. Article 437(6) states the floor’s most important feature: the right to information and inspection cannot be removed or restricted by the articles or by a resolution of any company organ. A confidentiality clause in the articles that purports to limit shareholders to annual financials is void, and a general assembly resolution to that effect is void under Article 447(1)(b) as well.
The ten-day court route
Article 437(5) provides that a shareholder whose request for information or inspection is left unanswered, unjustly refused or postponed may apply to the commercial court at the company’s seat within ten days of the refusal or, in other cases, after a reasonable time; the application is heard under the simplified procedure, the court’s decision may include an order to provide the information outside the general assembly and specify the form, and the decision is final. Two features make this the most efficient remedy in Turkish company law. The procedure is summary, decided on documents and typically within weeks rather than years; and the decision is not subject to appeal. A board that refuses information at the general assembly without a reasoned Article 437(3) ground should therefore expect an order to provide it, and a refusal that looks like an attempt to hide a related-party transaction or a disguised distribution will be recorded in a court decision that the shareholder then uses to found the next step.
The special audit: general assembly first
Article 438(1) allows every shareholder, where necessary for the exercise of shareholder rights and where the right to information or inspection has already been used, to request the general assembly to have specific events clarified by a special audit, even if the matter is not on the agenda. The two preconditions matter: the request must concern specific events, not the company’s affairs at large, and the shareholder must first have asked for information and been refused or left unsatisfied, which is why the Article 437 request is step one in every dispute. If the general assembly approves, the company or any shareholder may within thirty days ask the commercial court at the company’s seat to appoint a special auditor (Article 438(2)). Approval by the majority is unusual where the majority is the target, so the Code provides a second route.
When the general assembly refuses: the ten per cent route
Article 439(1) provides that where the general assembly refuses the special audit request, shareholders representing at least one-tenth of the capital (one-twentieth in public companies), or shareholders whose shares have an aggregate nominal value of at least one million lira, may within three months ask the commercial court to appoint a special auditor. Article 439(2) sets the test: the auditor is appointed if the applicants show convincingly that the founders or company organs have violated the law or the articles and thereby harmed the company or the shareholders. “Convincingly” is less than proof and more than suspicion; the applicant needs a coherent account supported by the documents obtained under Article 437 and the refusal recorded under Article 437(5). Under Article 440 the court hears the company and the applicants, and if it grants the request it defines the subject of the examination and appoints one or more independent experts; its decision is final. For a startup cap table the arithmetic is simple: an investor group with ten per cent, or angels whose shares add up to one million lira in nominal value, can obtain a court-appointed forensic examination of specific transactions over the founders’ objection, and founders cannot contract out of it.
How the audit works and what happens to the report
Article 441 requires the special audit to be conducted within a useful period and without unnecessary disruption; the board must allow examination of the books, correspondence, cash, securities and other assets; founders, organs, agents, employees, trustees and liquidators must inform the auditor about material facts, with the court deciding disputes finally; the auditor obtains the company’s view on the results and is bound by confidentiality. Under Article 442 the auditor reports in detail to the court, protecting company secrets; the court serves the report on the company and decides on the company’s request to withhold parts whose disclosure would harm its secrets or other protected interests; and the court gives the company and the applicants the opportunity to comment and to ask further questions. Under Article 443 the board submits the report and its comments to the next general assembly, and every shareholder may request a copy within one year. Article 444 allocates cost: where the court appointed the auditor, it fixes the advance and the costs payable by the company and may shift them wholly or partly to the applicants where special circumstances justify it; where the general assembly ordered the audit, the company bears the costs. The report is admissible in the liability action under Article 553 that usually follows, and is the reason the special audit is the minority’s most powerful pre-litigation tool.
The floor and the agreement together
Investors should draft contractual information rights knowing three things about the floor. The monthly pack is discoverable by every shareholder who asks at the general assembly under Article 437(2), so routing sensitive reporting through the nominee director is the confidentiality tool. The Article 437(5) court route is faster than any contractual remedy, so the agreement should not waive or complicate it, and the investor should preserve the record of a refusal. And the special audit thresholds of Article 439 are an argument for holding ten per cent, or for aggregating with other minorities to reach it. Founders should draft knowing that a refusal without a reasoned Article 437(3) ground escalates within weeks, that the articles cannot restrict the right, and that the best defence against a special audit is a general assembly at which questions are answered fully and recorded.
Can we limit information rights to shareholders above a threshold?
Not the statutory floor: Article 437(6) forbids restriction by the articles or any organ. Contractual reporting can be limited to the parties to the shareholders’ agreement, but Article 437(2) lets any shareholder claim at the general assembly what was given to another shareholder in that capacity.
Our angel asked to inspect the books. Must we let him?
Inspection of the books and correspondence needs general assembly permission or a board resolution (Article 437(4)) and can be limited to the parts relevant to his question. Information about the company’s affairs at the general assembly is his right unless Article 437(3) applies. An unjustified refusal goes to court within ten days.
How much does a special audit cost and who pays?
The court fixes an advance and the costs, payable by the company where the court appointed the auditor, unless special circumstances justify shifting them to the applicants; where the general assembly ordered the audit, the company pays (Article 444). Budget for expert fees comparable to a forensic accounting engagement.
Related: information rights · shareholder · director liability · challenging general assembly resolutions.
Sources. Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 (Articles 200, 392, 437–444, 447, 553). Statute links open the official Turkish texts on mevzuat.gov.tr.
This article is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Please seek legal support for an assessment of any specific matter.
Author
More from Vircon Insights
Shareholder Loans in a Turkish Company: Founder Advances, Hidden Capital and Arm's-Length Interest (TCC 358, KVK 12–13)
October 9, 2026Group Companies After the Flip-Up: Control, the Dependency Report and Loss Compensation Under TCC 195–209
October 8, 2026AI in KYC, AML and Credit Operations: Who Stays Responsible Under Turkish and EU Rules (October 2026)
October 30, 2026Designing a Startup's Articles of Association: What Belongs in the Articles, What Belongs in the Shareholders' Agreement (TCC 339–340, 480)
October 29, 2026Challenging a General Assembly Resolution in Türkiye: Annulment Within Three Months, Nullity at Any Time (TCC 445–451)
October 28, 2026Share Transfer Restrictions: Bağlam Clauses in an A.Ş. (TCC 491–494), General Assembly Approval in a Limited (TCC 595) and the Shareholders' Agreement
October 27, 2026Related Practice Areas
Corporate Law
Share transfers, capital increases, board structuring, governance.
View service →Startup Law
Incorporation, founder agreements, ESOP, term sheets, regulatory matters.
View service →ICOs, Crypto & Blockchain
Crypto-asset regulation, token offerings, exchange and custody licensing.
View service →