The challenge for nullity of an arbitral award pursuant to Article 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure has the character of a limited challenge, admitted exclusively for specific procedural defects and for non-observance of rules of law within the limits indicated by the provision itself, without introducing an appellate judgment that would enable the judge to re-examine the merits of the arbitrators' decision.
The allegation of nullity of an arbitral award for non-observance of rules of law requires the explicit allegation of the erroneousness of the rule of law applied in relation to the elements established by the arbitrators and cannot be advanced in connection with the mere assertion of gaps in investigation and reasoning which could evidence non-observance of law only following verification of the omitted or inadequate examination of decisive circumstances.
In case of preventive composition with assignment of assets (concordato preventivo con cessione dei beni), nothing prevents arbitral proceedings for the determination of debt-credit relationships pertaining to the concordat enterprise, provided that authorisation from the delegated judge exists, the acceptance of the arbitral procedure constituting a suitable instrument to achieve recognition of third parties' rights and an act of extraordinary administration.
The admission to preventive composition proceedings of one of the contracting parties does not entail the automatic lapse of the agreement stipulated before the opening of the proceedings to refer the dispute between the parties to arbitrators.
The belated contestation of the procedural standing of the liquidator who concluded the arbitration agreement following judicial authorisation and actively participated in the arbitral proceedings by formulating claims, when it does not constitute the subject of a specific ground of challenge, conflicts with the principles of contractual good faith and procedural loyalty.
The res judicata effect of the ruling on lack of jurisdiction by the ordinary court due to devolution to the arbitral tribunal produces reflexive efficacy in the proceedings for challenge of the award, precluding the assertion of defects relating to the arbitrability of the dispute which should have been raised in that forum.