The proceedings for the challenge of the arbitral award have as their sole object the review of the lawfulness of the decision rendered by the arbitrators, not the re-examination of the questions of merit submitted to them, so that the findings of fact made by the arbitrators are not open to challenge in proceedings for the challenge of the arbitral award, save where the reasoning on the point is entirely absent or wholly deficient. It follows that an appeal in cassation which amounts to the mere restatement of the arguments advanced in support of the ground of challenge pursuant to art. 829 cod. proc. civ., without engaging with the specific rationes decidendi of the judgment of the Court of Appeal, is inadmissible.
In the matter of public service concessions and the repurchase of installations by the granting authority, the fair compensation provided for by art. 24 r.d. n. 2578/1925, determined in accordance with the criteria for estimating the residual industrial value of installations set out in art. 13 d.P.R. n. 902/1986, must be calculated without including that part of the installation which was constructed by means of costs borne by private parties for individual connections, the outgoing concessionaire not being entitled to obtain compensation for costs not incurred, as otherwise unjust enrichment would arise.
In the determination of the residual industrial value of installations subject to repurchase pursuant to art. 13 d.P.R. n. 902/1986, the expression ‘costs for the conversion of installations in order to adapt them to the requirements of the production process’, deductible from the replacement value as new, does not include costs connected with the making safe of installations, which fall upon the granting authority which repurchases the installations and acquires ownership thereof, given that, were it otherwise, the grantor would be unjustly enriched to the detriment of the outgoing concessionaire.