In proceedings brought by a bankruptcy trustee for the recovery of a debt owed to the bankrupt estate, the defendant may raise by way of set-off the existence of their own counter-claim against the bankruptcy estate, provided that such defence is directed exclusively to neutralise the claimant’s action by obtaining its total or partial dismissal, whereas the special procedure for the verification of liabilities applies in the case of a counterclaim aimed at obtaining a declaration or an order for payment of the amount exceeding the debt sued upon.
The ground of nullity of an award for contradictoriness provided for in Article 829, paragraph 1, No. 4, of the Code of Civil Procedure must be understood in the sense that such contradictoriness must emerge between the different components of the operative part, or between the reasoning and the operative part, whereas internal contradictoriness between different parts of the reasoning may assume relevance as a ground of nullity of the award only insofar as it renders absolutely impossible the reconstruction of the logical and legal reasoning underlying the decision due to the total absence of reasoning referable to its functional model.
To establish whether challenge of an award for violation of rules of law on the merits of the dispute is admissible, the applicable regime must be identified as that in force at the time of the conclusion of the arbitration agreement, so that in the case of an agreement concluded prior to the entry into force of Legislative Decree No. 40 of 2006, in the absence of agreement by the parties, challenge of the award for violation of rules relating to the merits must be understood to be admissible.