The application of equitable criteria in liquidation of damages under Article 1226 of the Civil Code by an arbitral tribunal does not transform an award pronounced "according to law" into an award pronounced "according to equity," equity constituting, in the specific case, only the parameter to which the adjudicating body conforms for quantification of damages as normatively permitted.
A pronouncement "according to equity" in arbitral proceedings is one that releases itself from abstract norms, finding in the principle of equity the solution to the dispute, differently from application of equitable principles for specific aspects of the decision within reasoning developed according to law.
Recourse to equitable criteria under Article 1226 of the Civil Code for liquidation of damages constitutes application of rules of law and does not determine violation of Article 822 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which prohibits arbitrators from pronouncing according to equity save express authorisation by the parties.
The discretionary power to determine the amount of damages equitably pursuant to Article 1226 of the Civil Code, not being censurable in legality proceedings except for defects of reasoning, cannot constitute grounds for challenging an arbitral award for nullity arising from non-observance of rules of law under Article 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure.