Chancery Division of the High Court
Claim No: CR-2024-004856 - [2025] EWHC 2304 (Ch)
Fecha: 10-Sep-2025
Disputes over the business of Koza Ltd
Disputes over the business of Koza Ltd
Koza Altin argues that the Interim Regime has manifestly failed to “hold the ring”. Certainly I agree that it has been a source of repeated and continuing dispute requiring frequent revision. Koza Altin also considers that if it persists, will almost certainly continue to generate disputes in the future. I will consider that point further below.
Koza Altin argues also that Mr Ipek has refused to comply with special resolutions. Mr Ipek argues that this was for good reasons. Again I will discuss this further below.
- Heading
- Introduction This hearing is dealing with an application (the “ Application ”) made by the Petitioner, Koza Altin İşletmeleri A.Ş. (“ Koza Altin ”), for summary judgment on (or alternatively strike out of the defe
- BACKGROUND Parties
- The confiscation of shares in Koza Altin
- The A ordinary share
- The ordinary shareholders’ Article 4 rights
- The 2016 and 2021 Proceedings
- The Interim Regime
- Disputes over the business of Koza Ltd
- SUMMARY OF KOZA ALTIN’S GROUNDS FOR WINDING UP
- LEGAL PRINCIPLES: SUMMARY JUDGMENT
- LEGAL PRINCIPLES: JUST AND EQUITABLE WINDING-UP
- ARE THERE GROUNDS FOR JUST AND EQUITABLE WINDING-UP?
- IS KOZA ALTIN THE 100% ECONOMIC OWNER?
- The dividend yield basis
- The share of net asset basis
- The value of the right to extract value
- Nuisance value
- My conclusions on the report
- DOES KOZA ALTIN HAVE NO CONTROL? The position up to the hearing
- The position following the undertaking given in the course of the hearing
- UNREASONABLE REFUSAL OF AN ALTERNATIVE
- COLLATERAL PURPOSE
- UNCLEAN HANDS
- STRIKE-OUT APPLICATIONS
- Conclusions