The objection of lack of jurisdiction on grounds of arbitration constitutes a preliminary issue which must be examined as a matter of priority over cessation of the subject matter of the dispute, insofar as it relates to the conditions for the validity of the proceedings, whereas the latter represents a supervening event which occurs after the commencement of the procedural relationship.
The objection based on an arbitration agreement raised before the ordinary court constitutes an objection of lack of jurisdiction and not a question of merit, and must be qualified as a preliminary issue within the system of distribution of jurisdictional power.
Arbitration clauses contained in the constitutional documents of companies may refer to arbitrators all disputes arising between shareholders or between shareholders and the company, provided that they concern available rights relating to the corporate relationship, pursuant to Article 838-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure.
In case of doubt, an arbitration agreement shall be interpreted in the sense that arbitral jurisdiction extends to all disputes which arise from the contract or relationship to which the agreement refers, according to the principle “in dubio pro arbitrato” under Article 808-quater of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The presence of an arbitration clause does not prevent a party from requesting and obtaining from the ordinary court a decree for payment (decreto ingiuntivo), without prejudice to the right of the respondent to raise the objection of arbitral jurisdiction in opposition proceedings, with the consequent obligation for the court to revoke the decree for payment and refer the parties to the arbitrators.
Proceedings instituted before a court continue before the arbitrators if one of the parties proceeds to resumption within three months of the judgment declaring lack of jurisdiction on grounds of an arbitration agreement becoming final, pursuant to Article 819-quater of the Code of Civil Procedure.