The interpretation of the contract operated by the referees constitutes assessment of fact not unionable in the judgment of appeal of the award, Salvo the case in which the motivation is comp ledly missing or absolute deficient, having to the judgment of appeal limits to the verification of the legitimacy of the decision arbitration without review of the issues of merit.
The violation of the order public ex art. 829, co. 3, cod. Proc. Civ. Appeal when the interpretation contractual of the referees is quibble, artificial or of the all strangers Ai principles of good faith and correctness, not when the interpretation, although not shared, it is supported by motivation adequate and reconstructable in the logical-legal process followed.
The contradiction of the Lodo of to which in art. 829, co. 1, n. 11, Cod. Proc. Civ. Appeals only in case of contrast between the different components of the device device device and motivation such to make the pronunciation insese DHUIBLE, while the contradictory internal contradiction between different parts of the motivation detects only when it is it the reconstruction of the iTER logical-legal reconstruction per total absence of motivation attributable to the functional model.
The violation of the limits of the convention of arbitration ex art. 829, co. 1, n. 4, cod. Proc. Civ. Not recurrence when the referees si pronuncino on questions adjustment E proposals in the area of the object of the controversy compromise, even if interpret clauses contractual in way different from the expectations of one of the parts.