An application for revocation of Court of Cassation judgments ordering remittal is admissible where the alleged revocatory error concerns a procedural defect arising from an error of fact, where the erroneously perceived fact was decisive in the enunciation of the legal principle, or where within the economy of the judgment it was determinative for the quashing on grounds of defective reasoning. However, such application is inadmissible if the error led to the failure to examine issues which may be subject to fresh consideration by the court on remittal.
A revocatory error relevant under Article 395, No. 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure must consist in an erroneous perception of the facts of the case which induced the supposition of the existence or non-existence of a fact whose truth is incontestably excluded or established by the record. Such error must possess the characteristics of absolute evidence and immediate detectability, must be essential and decisive, must relate only to acts internal to the cassation proceedings, and cannot concern interpretative and evaluative activity nor errors of substantive or procedural law.
The contractual nature of arbitration (arbitrato irrituale) is inferred not only from the attribution to arbitrators of powers as *amiable compositeur*, but also from the parties’ manifest intention to resort to exclusively contractual instruments, from the absence in the arbitration clause of specific proceduralised activities of the arbitrators and of precise appointment criteria suitable to infer an objective character of independence, as well as from the generic determination of the subject matter of the activity entrusted to the arbitral tribunal.