The arbitration clause maintains its efficacy and autonomy with respect to the contract to which it refers even after contractual withdrawal, extending to restitutionary disputes arising from the performance or termination of the contractual relationship.
An action seeking the restitution of sums of money following contractual withdrawal falls within arbitral jurisdiction when the arbitration clause refers to all disputes relating to or otherwise connected with the contract, in application of the extensive interpretation criterion provided for in article 808-quater of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The lack of jurisdiction of the ordinary court in favour of that of arbitrators results in the nullity of the payment order issued in violation of the arbitration clause, requiring a judgment and not an order by reason of the decisory content that goes beyond the mere question of jurisdiction.
Article 38, paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure concerning the removal of the case from the court roll for acceptance of the plea of lack of jurisdiction does not apply to arbitral jurisdiction, which is not subject to the full disposition of the parties like derogable territorial jurisdiction.