In short
Expulsion from a partnership in a limited company is the ending of a partner's status as partner. The claim may rest on a decision of the organs for a reason in the company contract, or on the court for a just cause. Dismissal of the manager is not this claim. A voting rate is not fixed here. The reading starts with the minute of expulsion or with the court judgment. A writing of dismissal does not stand in for this document.
How expulsion ends the status of partner
The person who is expelled leaves the share. The counterpart is looked for according to the real value of the share. The formula of the value is not here. The status is not treated as erased on paper before the payment is written. The value is read from the document in the file. A figure torn from the balance sheet is not pasted in the place of the account of the real value. The method of the account is not fixed in this text. The claim carries, together, the ending of the status and the separate showing of the price.
Expulsion aims at the status of partner. Who the share will remain with is not treated as closed before the value is discussed. The company cannot strike the partner from the list and treat the price as absent. The document of the price and the decision of expulsion stand side by side. If there is a decision and there is no price, the status is not accepted as ended on paper. If there is a price and there is no decision, it is not said that the expulsion was completed either. The two documents are looked for together.
Does dismissal of the manager stand in for expulsion
Removing the manager from office does not prevent the person remaining a partner. The writing of dismissal recounts that separation. The minute of expulsion does not stand in for the minute of dismissal of the manager. The status of partner does not fall by itself without a decision of expulsion or a court judgment. A person whose office as manager has ended may stand on the register as a partner. The partner line on the register is not treated as erased by the writing of dismissal. Which line changed is read from a current copy of the register.
Even if dismissal and expulsion were discussed at the same meeting, the two decisions are two sentences of a minute. One recounts removal from office. The other recounts the status of partner. If the sentences were written mixed, what the organ decided is read from the verb in the text. If the verb is only dismissal, expulsion is not assumed. If the verb is expulsion, the office of manager is not treated as ended without being stated separately. The petition carries this separation too.
Why a voting rate does not stand here
If there is a reason for expulsion written in the contract, the decision of the organ is tied to that reason. On a just cause, the court looks at the character of the event. The majority the statute looks for is read from the text. This text does not write a share rate. A memorised rate does not complete a new decision. The reason in the contract and the ground in the minute are placed side by side. If the ground is not in the reason, the decision is not treated as having carried that reason.
Annulment of a general meeting debates a decision that was taken. A claim of expulsion aims at ending the status of partner. Even if the decision is debated separately later, the two writings do not build the same petition. Annulment does not take the expulsion back by itself. Taking it back, or the price, is read from its own document. The application separates in the heading which claim was opened. If the heading is expulsion, the conditions of annulment are not carried here.
The document of the price stands beside the decision
The document that shows the real value of the share stands beside the decision of expulsion. If there is a decision and there is no price, the status is not treated as erased on paper. If there is a price and there is no decision of expulsion or court judgment, it is not said that the partnership ended by itself. There is no formula here. A line torn from the balance sheet is not pasted in the place of the account of the value. The value is read from the document in the file. Leaving someone off the list before the payment is written does not show the status as ended.
The reason for expulsion in the contract is read together with the ground in the minute. If the ground is not in the reason, the decision is not treated as having carried that reason. On a just cause, the court looks at the character of the event. This look does not write a share rate. The majority is read from the text of the statute and of the contract. If dismissal of the manager passed at the same meeting, that sentence is kept apart and is not put in the place of expulsion. Annulment of the general meeting does not build the petition of this claim either.
How the two claims are separated
Expulsion from the partnership is not taken for the same claim as dismissal of the manager. Counsel in Ankara separates from the file that the office being in Çankaya does not change the majority or the value of the share. The district of the office address does not rewrite the reason in the contract. The reason and the value are read from the document. The frame that separates expulsion from dismissal of the company manager and from annulment of a general-meeting decision stands on the commercial law page.
Conclusion
Expulsion ends the status of partner. Dismissal of the manager and annulment of the general meeting are in separate places. A rate is not here. The real value of the share is read from the document, and the formula is not fixed. The basis is Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102.