The principle that an objection of arbitral jurisdiction raised in time in proceedings opposing an order for payment requires the order to be set aside applies only where the order-for-payment proceedings directly concern a debt arising out of the substantive relationship covered by the arbitration clause and not yet decided by the arbitrators.
Where the arbitration clause has already been given effect, the dispute covered by it having actually been referred to the arbitrator and disposed of by an award, the bringing of an opposition to an order for payment founded on that award does not require the dispute already decided to be referred once again to the arbitrators.
Proceedings opposing an order for payment founded on an award in contractual arbitration (arbitrato irrituale) cannot be the forum for a fresh examination of the merits of the questions already submitted to the arbitrator and decided by him, outside the grounds for annulment exhaustively provided for by art. 808 ter cod. proc. civ.
An award in contractual arbitration (arbitrato irrituale) is contractual in nature and the arbitrator’s determination binds the parties within the limits and according to the regime proper to that form of arbitration; complaints which amount to a request for a fresh assessment of the facts and findings already examined by the arbitrator are inadmissible.
An award in contractual arbitration (arbitrato irrituale), although not constituting an enforceable instrument capable of being declared enforceable in the forms provided for an award in arbitration proper, constitutes written evidence of the debt capable of founding the issue of an order for payment pursuant to art. 633 cod. proc. civ.
The formally declaratory nature of the arbitral ruling does not deprive the award of its capacity to evidence the debt, since for the purposes of order-for-payment proceedings the document relied upon need not already constitute an enforceable instrument or contain an order to pay, provided that the determination identifies the creditor, the debtor, the source of the relationship and the exact amount of the performance due.