Challenge of an arbitration award does not constitute a common appeal against the decision taken by the arbitrators, being limited to ascertainment of the causes of nullity provided for by Article 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure specifically alleged in the appeal, and is not directed to a re-evaluation of the facts, even solely from the perspective of scrutiny of the adequacy and soundness of the reasoning of the award.
The defect of want of reasoning in an arbitration award pursuant to Article 829, number 5, of the Code of Civil Procedure is configurable only where the reasoning of the award is wholly wanting or is so deficient as not to permit identification of the ratio of the decision adopted, or is such as to denote a process of reasoning absolutely unacceptable on the dialectical plane, so as to resolve itself into a non-reasoning.
The hypothesised internal contradiction in the reasoning of an arbitration award does not legitimate challenge for nullity pursuant to Article 829, number 11, of the Code of Civil Procedure, save that it determines the absolute impossibility of reconstruction of the logical and juridical process underlying the decision by reason of total absence of reasoning reducible to its functional model.