The principle of translatio iudicii (transfer of proceedings between jurisdictions) applies also to the relationship between arbitral proceedings and ordinary court proceedings, so that, following a ruling declaring the lack of jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal, the substantive and procedural effects of the claim are preserved in the proceedings continued before the court having jurisdiction.
Where an arbitral award is annulled on the ground of the arbitral tribunal's lack of jurisdiction, the resumption of proceedings before the competent ordinary court does not entail the commencement of new proceedings but rather constitutes the continuation of the original proceedings, maintaining a unitary structure and preserving all the substantive and procedural effects of those conducted before the arbitrators lacking jurisdiction.
The right to resume proceedings before the ordinary court, following a declaration that the arbitral tribunal lacked jurisdiction, derives directly from the law and does not require an express ruling by the court that found the arbitrators lacked jurisdiction.
In proceedings for the challenge of an arbitral award, following a ruling declining jurisdiction, where no time limit for seising the court having jurisdiction has been specified, the six-month time limit provided for by Article 50 of the Code of Civil Procedure applies by analogy.