In theme of arbitration, the penalty of nullity foreseen by art. 829, co. 1, n. 4, cod. Proc. Civ., Per the praise containing provisions contradictory not corresponds a that of art. 360, c o. 1, n. 5, cod. proc. civ., ma it is understanding in the sense that dictates contradictory must emerge between different components of the device or between the motivation and the device, the C C ONTRADDITITITY INTERNAL between the different parts of the motivation, not expressly foreseen between i vices that involve the nullity of the praise, can assume relevance, which vice vice, solant o in what determines the impossibility absolute of reconstruct the logical process and legal below to decision per total absence a motivation attributable to its functional model.