234 NEWSLETTER 2021 When these decisions are examined, it can be concluded that the reasons for appeal should not bind the Regional Courts ofAppeal when reviewing judgments for errors of law. Considering that the judge also has to implement the law ex officio in accordance with Article 33 of CPC, it can be argued that an explicit violation of the law is also within the scope of appeal in such cases. However, it should be emphasized that the purpose of the appellate jurisdiction of the Regional Courts of Appeal is not to ensure the unity of law. For this reason, it is accepted that the Courts should only reverse judgments in cases where an error of law is so serious that it amounts to a violation of public order. Regulations governing the Court of Cassation state that it is not bound by the reasons for appeal according to Article 369 of CPC but can also review decisions where there is an explicit violation of the law. In the absence of an explicit regulation for the Regional Courts of Appeal, it is controversial whether explicit illegality can also be reviewed under their appellate jurisdiction. Conclusion The appellate jurisdiction of the Regional Courts of Appeal has great importance since these courts conduct both factual and legal review. In this regard, the reasons for the appeal must be specified in the petition of appeal. However, if the reasons for appeal are not specified in the petition of appeal, only a limited review is conducted to determine if an error is so grave as to constitute a violation of public order. For this reason, considering that the appellate review can be conducted limited to the reasons specified in the petition of appeal, specifying the reasons for appeal is perhaps the most significant factor that determines the scope of the appeal review. As a result, to avoid any loss of rights, the reasons for appeal must be specified in the petition of appeal.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjUzNjE=