In application of art. 821 Cod. Proc. Civ., The decier of the term of which in art. 820 cod. Proc. Civ. Not can be to be done which is worth which cause of nullity of the praise if the part, first of its resolution, not has it it has notified at other parts and to referees the intention of to do the decadence. it must also be specified that the said art. 821 cod. proc. civ. imposes the notification all the parts of the judgment ED is deprived the m Ancesta Constitution of the content in question, expected that the code of rite not contains a discipline of the judgment arbitral in default and, being inapplicable art. 292 of the Italian Civil Code proc., not it could not even being Spread the superfluity of the notification in its comparisons of the act of which to art. 821 of the Italian Civil Code civ. [but cf., on the application analogical of art. 292 cod. proc. civ., cass., section i civ., 6 September 2021, n. 24008].
The sentence declarative of the unproponability of the question, because donated to cognition of the referees, not binds these the last one as to the legal existence and validity of the clause compromise ria, belonging ad they check the regularity of the their investiture ad work of the contractors. nor it follows that the judged deriving from the omitted appeal of that statuition is merely formal, pre Clusivo of the re -proposal of the itself question before the judge of the same trial, ma not in a different judgment promoted by the parts to before other authority judicial, nor explains efficacy vi ncolante in the subsequent procedure arbitration, which, Salvo the case of summation of the judgment ex art. 50 cod. proc. civ. and application of the rules and of the principles of right relative to translatio iudicii.