A challenge to a contractual arbitration award (arbitrato irrituale) must be brought by way of ordinary proceedings and may relate exclusively to defects in the manifestation of contractual consent, such as mistake, duress, fraud or incapacity, whilst the allegation of errors of law, whether in the evaluation of evidence or in the decision, is precluded, by reason of the merely contractual effect of such type of award, which is not equivalent to a judgment.
In matters of contractual arbitration (arbitrato irrituale), one party's acceptance of a plea of lack of jurisdiction raised by the other party does not preclude the arbitral tribunal from ruling on its own jurisdiction and determining the costs of the proceedings, where the challenge to jurisdiction is based on circumstances relating to the cause of action and the arbitral jurisdiction is of a functional and mandatory nature.
A declaration of lack of jurisdiction pronounced in arbitration does not result in the exhaustion of the right to bring proceedings before a court in order to assert the same credit claim before the ordinary judicial authority, to which the determination of the obligatory relationships between the parties ordinarily belongs.