Corporate Law ·

Shareholder Disputes in a Bulgarian OOD: Exit and Protection

A disagreement between business partners can affect company decisions, access to information and the ability to leave. In a Bulgarian OOD, membership, management and money owed between the parties are separate issues that need a coordinated response.

Legal sources checked: 11 October 2026

Identify the rights involved

Start with the current company agreement, Commercial Register file, ownership percentages, management arrangements and any separate shareholders' agreement. An OOD has membership interests rather than the shares of a joint-stock company, although foreign founders often use the word “shareholder” for both.

Distinguish a member's rights from a manager's powers, a shareholder loan, an additional contribution, employment pay and a personal guarantee. Leaving the company as a member does not automatically cancel those other relationships. The interests of the company and those of an individual member can also conflict, so clarify who the lawyer would represent.

Secure information and a record of events

Article 123 of the Commercial Act includes rights to information about company affairs and inspection of company records. Make a specific, documented request for the material needed to understand the issue: accounts, meeting minutes, contracts or transaction records. Keep proof of requests, responses and any refusal.

Preserve records you can lawfully access. A dispute is not permission to enter another person's account, remove company data or obstruct operations. Review voting thresholds, meeting notices and the company agreement before assuming that a 50/50 disagreement prevents every decision or permits unilateral action.

Do not miss a resolution-challenge deadline

A claim under Article 74 challenges a general-meeting resolution that conflicts with mandatory law or the company's constitutive document. The usual period is 14 days from the meeting if the claimant attended or was duly invited; otherwise it is 14 days from learning of the decision, subject to an outer limit of three months from the meeting.

Record when the invitation arrived, the agenda, attendance and when the decision became known. Negotiations do not by themselves preserve the deadline. Other defects or infringements may require a different remedy; not every dispute is an Article 74 case. Any request for interim protection or a stay of registration requires separate assessment.

Compare a negotiated transfer with withdrawal

A negotiated sale can settle price, timing, shareholder loans, releases and responsibility for unfinished work. Transfer to another member and transfer to an outsider have different requirements. The prescribed notarial form, company decisions and register filings must be addressed; a private email agreeing a price is not the whole transaction.

Article 125(2) permits a member to end participation by written notice given at least three months before termination. Check the company agreement, delivery and the intended effective date before serving notice. Under Article 125(3), financial consequences are determined using a balance sheet at the end of the month of termination. That is not a promise of a negotiated market price or automatic repayment of every sum invested.

Plan the register and management steps separately

In Interpretative Decision No. 1/2020 of 31 May 2023, the Supreme Court of Cassation held that a member leaving under Article 125(2) cannot personally apply to register the termination solely in that capacity when the company's organs fail to act. Serving notice is therefore not a complete plan for resolving register inaction.

If the person is also a manager, resignation and removal from the register follow their own requirements. Bank mandates, contractual guarantees, company devices and access rights should be addressed expressly. Do not assume that withdrawal releases a guarantee given to a bank or extinguishes a debt owed by the departing member.

Exclusion and dissolution require grounds

Exclusion cannot safely be used as a shortcut to settle a personal disagreement. The applicable statutory ground, any required warning, notice, voting and form must be examined. A member receiving a warning or resolution should obtain an assessment promptly, including the deadline and correct route for a challenge.

Judicial dissolution for important reasons under Article 155(1) is a possible remedy for members holding more than one fifth of the capital, but disagreement alone does not guarantee dissolution. Evidence of the impact on the company matters. A buyout, revised governance or a carefully structured separation may produce a better commercial result.

Prepare for the first consultation

For arrangements before a dispute arises, see what members should agree before starting an OOD. A dispute assessment should turn the documents into a sequence of actions with clear responsibilities, dates and financial assumptions.

General legal information, based on sources checked on 11 October 2026. The applicable law, documents and facts determine the appropriate action.

Frequently asked questions

Can I leave an OOD by simply telling my business partner?

Article 125(2) requires written notice at least three months before termination. The company agreement, delivery, financial settlement and register consequences must be checked. An informal conversation is not a complete withdrawal process.

Will I receive the market value of my business interest on withdrawal?

Not automatically. Article 125(3) uses a balance-sheet basis at the end of the termination month. A negotiated transfer price and claims for loans or other payments are separate questions.

Can settlement talks extend the deadline to challenge a resolution?

Do not assume so. An Article 74 claim has short statutory periods linked to the meeting, invitation and knowledge of the decision. The deadline should be checked while negotiations continue.

About the author

Lachezar Vesov — Attorney at Law, Sofia

Admitted to the Sofia Bar Association in 2016 (reg. no. 1400697210). Practises in civil, corporate, administrative, banking and criminal matters, advising Bulgarian companies and municipal enterprises alongside foreign founders, investors and property buyers. Member of the Board of Directors of the National Palace of Culture, Sofia, and Chairman of the Appellate Commission of the Bulgarian Football Union’s Sofia Zonal Council.

← All articlesEnquire about this matter →