The action for annulment of an arbitral award is a form of review of limited scope, which may be brought only on the basis of specific errors in procedendo provided for by law and for non-observance by the arbitrators of the rules of law within the limits set by art. 829(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, with the consequent application of the rule requiring specificity in the formulation of the grounds.
Article 817(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure does not preclude the objection and the raising ex officio of the non-arbitrability of a dispute, whether because it concerns rights that cannot be disposed of or because an express prohibiting rule exists, even where the relevant objection was not raised in the arbitral proceedings.
An arbitration clause contained in a public contract concluded before the entry into force of Law No. 190 of 2012 is affected by supervening ineffectiveness pursuant to art. 1(19) of that law, which however does not preclude recourse to arbitration where authorisation by the government body of the public authority is given subsequently, including implicitly, through unequivocal conduct demonstrating the will to activate the arbitration clause.
Where arbitral proceedings are commenced after the entry into force of Legislative Decree No. 40 of 2006, but pursuant to an arbitration agreement concluded prior thereto, in the absence of any provision by the parties the challenge of the award for violation of rules of substantive law must be deemed admissible, as provided for by art. 829(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure in its earlier version.
In the proceedings for annulment of an arbitral award the rescindente phase does not permit the court to make findings of fact or to re-examine the merits of the claims; a re-examination on the merits is possible only in the rescissoria phase, following annulment of the award and within the limits of the petitum and the causae petendi put before the arbitrators.