Revolution Beauty has branded Boohoo's attempt to take control of the company as "value-destructive, opportunistic and self-serving".
In a statement issued to the London Stock Exchange, the business added that the fashion giant's move is "not being in the interests of the company's shareholders as a whole".
Revolution Beauty has also proposed postponing its annual general meeting from Tuesday, June 27, to a new date in either late July or early August.
READ MORE: Click here to sign up to the BusinessLive North West newsletter
Earlier this week, Boohoo launched a campaign to vote the chief executive, chief financial officer and chairman of Revolution Beauty off the board.
The Manchester-headquartered group, which holds a stake of around 26.6% in the company, said it intends to vote against the reappointment of CEO Bob Holt, chairman Derek Zissman and CFO Elizabeth Lake at Revolution Beauty's annual general meeting on June 27.
Boohoo has also revealed plans to appoint two of its non-executive directors, Alistair McGeorge and Neil Catto, to Revolution Beauty's board to become its new executive chairman and CFO respectively.
The fashion giant added that the "reconstituted board will then undertake a rigorous process to appoint additional independent directors".
Most Read
Boohoo also also requested that the existing board of Revolution Beauty does not proceed to appoint Rachel Maguire and Matthew Eatough as directors.
Boohoo first invested in Essex-based Revolution Beauty in August 2022 and further upped its stake in November last year.
The company was founded by Adam Minto and Tom Allsworth in 2014. It launched on AIM in 2021.
In a new statement to the London Stock Exchange, Revolution Beauty said: "The approach taken by Boohoo towards Revolution Beauty is nothing short of value-destructive, opportunistic and self-serving.
"At a time when, thanks to current management's tireless efforts, the company's fortunes are finally looking up, with business back on track and re-admission to trading on AIM being potentially imminent, Boohoo is seeking to stage a board and management control coup without making a general offer, or paying a single penny, to independent shareholders of the company, and with no reasonable justification for its wholesale and dramatic proposed changes to the executive management team.
"On 28 November 2022, when it acquired its latest stake in the company, boohoo publicly announced that it intended to be 'a supportive stakeholder and long-term partner', thereby justifying holding a 26.6% stake but not wishing to make a bid for the whole company.
"In conversations with the company's management since that announcement, Boohoo's representatives repeatedly reiterated that approach, emphasising its support for the strategy of value-creation for shareholders that the company's management team have been so focussed on since they joined the business.
Don’t miss
"Peremptorily seeking to remove the majority of the current directors and executive management, with no consultation or prior warning to the board, and replacing them with directors from Boohoo's own very different business, however, paints a very different picture. These are certainly not the actions of any reasonable 'strategic' shareholder.
"The current directors also believe that a relevant factor for the independent shareholders of the company in considering the current situation is whether any of boohoo's board members, their associates, or any other persons connected with boohoo, owns shares in the company and whether, in fact, the total shareholding of Boohoo and its associated or otherwise connected persons is truly limited to 26.6%.
"The directors would consider it to be surprising if Boohoo, with a shareholding of just 26.6% (assuming that is correct), would launch such an aggressive public campaign without the support of, or having first consulted with, other major shareholders of the company.
"The board would therefore question whether, if other shareholders were in fact in discussions with Boohoo to take control of the company's board (as Boohoo is attempting to do), the potential legal and regulatory consequences of any such possible alliances or discussions have been properly considered."