In matters concerning the relationship between arbitrator and ordinary judge, following the ruling of partial unconstitutionality of article 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure, the principle of *translatio iudicii* (transfer of proceedings) applies with application of article 50 of the Code of Civil Procedure, but the decision on jurisdiction binds the judge *ad quem* (receiving judge), with article 44 of the Code of Civil Procedure finding no application.
An objection to lack of jurisdiction raised by a party who, in previous arbitration proceedings, had successfully obtained acceptance of the opposite objection regarding the arbitrators' lack of jurisdiction is inadmissible, as such conduct contravenes the prohibition against *venire contra factum proprium* (acting contrary to one's own previous conduct) and constitutes abusive use of procedural instruments aimed solely at preventing or delaying a decision on the merits.
A declaration of lack of jurisdiction adopted by arbitrators may be challenged for nullity pursuant to article 827 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the Court of Appeal in cases involving matters that cannot be arbitrated, matters that were not the subject of the arbitration agreement, or in case of nullity of the arbitration agreement, whereas the judge's ruling is subject to jurisdictional review under article 819-ter, paragraph 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure.