The dissensus between the Civil Departments of the Supreme Court, regarding unappealability of the decisions to be made upon objections in cases of acceptance or rejection of interim junction requests by first-degree courts, has been the subject of a DECISION BY THE SUPREME COURT STARE DECISIS ASSEMBLY OF CIVIL CHAMBERS. The decision by the SUPREME COURT STARE DECISIS ASSEMBLY OF CIVIL CHAMBERS, with docket no. 2013/1 and decision no. 2014/1, was published in the Official Gazette dated April 17, 2014. The opinions of the First Civil Department, Third Civil Department and Seventeenth Civil Department, submitted to the First Directorate of the Supreme Court, can be summarized as follows: "It would not be appropriate to draw a conclusion, based on Paragraph 3 of Provisional Article 3 of the Law No.6100, that the duties appointed to regional courts of justice as per the Law No.6100 should be completely fulfilled by the Supreme Court. As also stated in the said Paragraph, it is provided that only those duties that are specified in the Law No. 1086, and those that are not against the said Law shall be fulfilled. As also provided in the first Paragraph of the said Article, the Law No.1086 only provides for provisional exercising of the provisions regarding appeal; moreover, as per the Law No.6100, interpretation of a legal remedy to be offered by regional courts of justice, regarding "interim junction decisions" as a temporary legal protection mechanism, as a means of appeal without any legal basis would not be considered in accordance with the objectives of the law and the rationale for the introduction of such mechanism. On the other hand, appeal is a legal mechanism to be utilized against final decisions by courts, as provided in Article 427 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). As the interim junction decision is a temporary measure which is subject to change if the related terms and conditions change, court orders regarding interim junction are cannot be appealed based on the Provisional Article 3 of the Law No.6100." The opinions of the Fourth Civil Department, Sixth Civil Department, Eighth Civil Department, Eleventh Civil Department, Thirteenth Civil Department, Eighteenth Civil Department, Nineteenth Civil Department and Twenty Third Civil Department, submitted to the First Directorate of the Supreme Court, can be summarized as follows: "Legal remedy applications filed as an objection against decisions of first-degree courts regarding rejection or acceptance interim junction requests should be regarded as a means of appeal as per Articles 341, 391/3 and Provisional Article 3 of the CCP No.6100." The decision by the SUPREME COURT STARE DECISIS ASSEMBLY OF CIVIL CHAMBERS, with docket no. 2013/1 and decision no. 2014/1, provides, with majority of votes, that "In cases of rejection or acceptance of interim junction requests from first-degree courts, decisions to be made upon objections shall not be appealable."