Disputes about compensation for damage suffered by concessionaires when the granting Administration fails to fulfil its obligations during the concession relationship may be decided by arbitration. These fall within the ordinary courts' jurisdiction because they concern not the exercise of governmental powers affecting how the relationship functions, but rather establishing whether there has been a breach of obligations that form part of the contractual legal relationship between equals.
An arbitration clause that gives only one party the right to decline arbitral jurisdiction and ask for the case to be decided by the ordinary courts is not invalid. It does not conflict with the limits of private autonomy. Rather, it expresses a tendency consistent with a system that favours public justice as the primary way of resolving conflicts.
Challenge proceedings for an arbitral award are a remedy with restricted grounds where specific grounds must be stated. In Supreme Court proceedings against the final judgment of those proceedings, the criticisms cannot simply refer to principles of law. They must make proper reference to facts that the arbitrators considered, to make the argued case self-sufficient and understandable.