Article 815, paragraph 1, no. 6-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure, insofar as it provides for the challenge of an arbitrator on serious grounds of convenience such as to affect independence or impartiality, constitutes a residual provision capable of encompassing not only situations relating to the relationships between the arbitrator and the parties, but also all those circumstances that could affect the calm and impartial elaboration of the decision by the members of the adjudicating body.
The time limit for submitting an application for challenge of an arbitrator, provided for by Article 815, paragraph 2, of the Code of Civil Procedure, is subject to the suspension of procedural time limits during the court vacation period.
The arbitrator appointed by a party and the chairman of the arbitral tribunal are subject to the same duties of independence and impartiality that rest upon a sole arbitrator, it being understood that the appointment of the chairman by the arbitrators designated by the parties confers upon him a more pronounced impartiality.
The sharing by arbitrators sitting on the same tribunal of the premises in which professional activity is carried out, together with the circumstance that one of them proposed to the other the appointment as chairman of the tribunal, constitutes a situation of potential moral debt of gratitude capable of constituting the serious grounds of convenience relevant for the purposes of challenge pursuant to Article 815, paragraph 1, no. 6-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure.