A dispute concerning the challenge of a resolution approving the financial statements of a company on the grounds of lack of truthfulness, clarity and accuracy is not capable of being referred to arbitration. The rules intended to guarantee such principles, although prescribing time limits for challenge with consequent curing of the nullity, are mandatory and, being enacted not only for the protection of each shareholder’s interest in being informed of the conduct of the company’s management but also for the protection of the reliance of third parties entering into relations with the company, transcend the interest of the individual and pertain to non-disposable rights.
In matters of arbitration, where a plurality of claims have been brought in proceedings, the existence of arbitral jurisdiction must be verified with specific regard to each of them, it being impossible to refer the entire dispute to the arbitrators or to the ordinary court by virtue of the mere connection between the claims, with the consequence that the objection of lack of jurisdiction must be raised with specific reference to the claim or claims in respect of which the alleged lack of jurisdiction is arguable.
In cases of doubt, in the absence of indications to the contrary arising from the arbitration clause, the statutory regime of arbitration as set out in the Code of Civil Procedure applies.