An arbitration clause providing for reference of "any possible dispute" to arbitration, without any provision establishing possible intervention by the ordinary judicial authority, does not allow one to consider that the parties intended to resolve disputes by means other than referral to arbitration.
A peremptory ten-day deadline for bringing arbitration proceedings is void under Article 2965 of the Civil Code when it makes exercise of the relevant right very difficult and burdensome, considering the lawyer's need to study the dispute, gather necessary documents, develop a strategy and prepare the necessary defence papers.
Partial nullity of the arbitration clause limited to the peremptory deadline does not extend to the entire clause when the interdependence of the rest of the contract on the void part is not demonstrated. One must presume that contractual arbitration allows the objective of speedy resolution of the dispute to be achieved better than action before the ordinary judicial authority.
In contractual arbitration, the presence of an arbitration clause does not make the ordinary court incompetent to hear the claim, but only makes it unenforceable.
The expression "individual clauses" in Article 1419 of the Civil Code must be understood as any part of the contractual regulation that has its own autonomy. This certainly includes provision of a time limit for bringing arbitration proceedings.