The sanction of nullity foreseen by art. 829, co. 1, n. 11, cod. Proc. Civ. Per the praise containing provisions contradictory not corresponds a of art. 360, co. 1, n. 5, cod. proc. civ., ma it goes understanding in the sense that said contradictory nature must emerge between the different components of the device, or between the motivation and the device, while the contradicted Ratà internal between the different parts of the motivation, not expressly foreseen between i vices which involve the nullity of the praise, can assume relevance, which vice of the praise, only q Uento determines the impossibility absolute of reconstruct the logical process and legal below to decision per total absence a a motivation attributable to its model functional model.
The evaluation of the facts deducts and of the tests acquired in the course of the procedure referee not can be to be contested, in what is such evaluation it is negotiated remittance to competence institutional of the arbitrator i. of consequence, it is to consider inadmissible an appeal where it is exposed directly and immediately the merit of the controversy, like in the case a appeal true and proper, of merit and a reasons free.