An arbitration clause contained in a contract maintains its binding effect even with respect to disputes arising from subsequent agreements which, whilst not expressly reproducing the arbitration clause, constitute mere modifications or addenda to the original contract, without constituting novation of the entire contractual relationship.
A settlement agreement subsequent to a contract containing an arbitration clause does not give rise to novation of the original relationship when there is neither express manifestation of the parties’ intention to extinguish the previous contract, nor objective incompatibility between the obligations of the pre-existing relationship and those arising from the settlement agreement.
Breach of the arbitration clause by a creditor who brings proceedings by way of payment order results in the lack of jurisdiction of the ordinary court pursuant to Article 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure, with consequent declaration of lack of jurisdiction to be pronounced by judgment and revocation of the payment order for nullity arising from the decision of a court lacking jurisdiction.
In proceedings for opposition to a payment order based on the defence of an arbitration clause, the decision allowing the opposition must contain the fixing of a peremptory time limit for resumption of the case before the arbitrator, applying by virtue of Article 24 of the Constitution the principles of preservation of the substantive and procedural effects of the claim analogous to those provided for by Article 50 of the Code of Civil Procedure.