Please note that the below English abstracts of Italian decisions were generated using AI to translate the relevant Italian abstract, and the translation was not humanly checked. As a consequence, it could be inaccurate. Nonetheless, it could be useful for non Italian (and non Italian speaking) practitioners to get an overall idea of Italian case law.

Anyone interested in the contect of a specific decision, or looking for a translation into English of its text, may contact the general editor via email (roberto.oliva@arbitratoinitalia.it). 

Supreme Court

• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 3 January 2023, no. 38
  The mere provision, in the context of an arbitration clause, that the decision of the arbitrators must be rendered in accordance with the law is not sufficient to deem the award appealable pursuant to Article 829(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure for breach of the rules of law applicable to the merits of the dispute.
• Supreme Court, VI Civil Division, 4 January 2023, no. 126
  The declaration made by the lawyer of one party to that of the other that any dispute between the parties can only be dealt with before the ordinary courts has the meaning of a waiver of the arbitral proceedings.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 12 January 2023, no. 704
  The plaintiff has the right to bring an action, instead of before the arbitrators, before the ordinary courts within the term indicated in article 46 of Presidential Decree 1063/1962, and the defendant may request, within thirty days of the notification of the request for arbitration, that the dispute be decided by the courts.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 23 January 2023, no. 1999
  Respect for the principle of cross-examination must be appropriately adapted to the arbitral proceedings, as the parties must be given, in order to enable them to adequately defend themselves, the opportunity to set out their respective assumptions, to examine and analyse the evidence and results of the proceedings, to submit pleadings and replies and to be informed in good time of the opposing claims and requests.
• Supreme Court, VI Civil Division, 24 January 2023, no. 2057
  The objection of compromise, even if raised after the claims on the merits, requires the state court judge to rule on the same, since it cannot be inferred from the error in the grading of the exceptions that the logically preliminary issue has been waived, even though it was raised subsequently.
• Supreme Court, Sec. I Civ, 24 January 2023, no. 2166
  The defect of failure to state reasons referred to in Article 829(1)(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure can be recognised only in those cases in which the grounds of the award are completely non-existent or are so deficient as not to allow the rationale of the decision to be identified, or when they are characterised by the choice of an argumentative procedure that is absolutely unacceptable on a dialectical level, resulting in a sort of non-motivation.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 27 January 2023, no. 2558
  In a contract prepared unilaterally by a professional, the effectiveness of the waiver of the jurisdiction of the courts in favour of that of the arbitrators, like the waiver of the consumer’s jurisdiction, is subject not only to the specific approval in writing provided for by Art. 1341 of the Civil Code, but also – pursuant to Art. 34(4) of Legislative Decree 206/2005 – to the conduct of an individual negotiation with the consumer on the clause itself, the proof of which is charged to the same professional by Art. 34(5) of the aforementioned Legislative Decree.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 2 February 2023, no. 3271
  In order to establish whether an appeal for breach of the rules of law on the merits of the dispute is admissible, the law – to which article 829.3 of the Code of Civil Procedure refers – must be identified as the law in force at the time the arbitration agreement was concluded.
• Supreme Court, VI Civil Division, 13 February 2023, no. 4315
  The doubt as to the interpretation of the actual will of the contracting parties must be resolved in the sense of ritual arbitration, as the main model of arbitration, capable of ensuring the greatest guarantees for the parties that have so wished.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 21 February 2023, no. 5369
  In order for there to be an obligation of specific approval in writing of the arbitration clause pursuant to Art. 1341(2) of the Civil Code, it is not sufficient that one of the parties to the contract has approved the arbitration clause, it is not sufficient that one of the parties has drafted the entire content of the contract in such a way that the other party has no choice but to accept or reject it in its entirety, but it is also necessary that the scheme has been drafted and the general terms and conditions have been fixed to serve an indefinite series of relationships, both from a substantive point of view, because they have been drafted by a party that performs contractual activity for an undifferentiated plurality of parties, and from a formal point of view, because their content has been predetermined by means of forms or forms that can be used in series.
• Supreme Court, Full Court, 23 February 2023, no. 5694
  Arbitration proceedings initiated on the basis of an arbitration clause ancillary to a contract and for the assessment of a claim dependent thereon become unfeasible upon the occurrence of the compulsory liquidation of one of the parties to the contract, given the exclusivity of the assessment of liabilities in the bankruptcy proceedings to which the creditor party is in any case bound, pursuant to arts. 52 and 93 of the bankruptcy law, if the relationship is still pending, i.e. not exhausted pursuant to art. 72 of the bankruptcy law.
  The award nevertheless issued, before the expiry of the 60-day period assigned by Article 81 l.bankruptcy law to the insolvency body to declare its possible takeover of the underlying contract and without such a declaration having taken place, is null and void, with the consequent inability to produce effects already with respect to the insolvency proceedings, since the dissolution of the contract as a result of the opening of the competition creates a legal effect ex nunc, only resolutively conditioned on the commissioner’s decision to take over while it is possible and thus the arbitrators, in the case at hand, lack potestas judicandi.
• Supreme Court, VI Civil Division, 24 February 2023, no. 5793
  The favour for arbitral jurisdiction contained in Article 808-quater of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure refers only to cases where the doubt of interpretation concerns the “quantification” of the matter entrusted to the arbitrators by the relevant agreement and not the parties’ choice of arbitration itself. In this perspective, even in the presence of a clause referring to the cognisance of the arbitration board for “any and all disputes”, the reference also to recourse to the ordinary judicial authority renders uncertain the will of the parties on the choice of arbitration itself, thus not allowing the possibility of invoking the provision of article 808-quater of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 1 March 2023, no. 6150
  A partial award is immediately appealable, pursuant to Art. 827(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, only if, by deciding one or more claims, it has settled the case in relation to them, given the enforceability that the award may assume in this case, whereas immediate appealability must be excluded when the award has decided issues that arose in the arbitration proceedings, but without settling the case.
• Supreme Court, VI Civil Division, 2 March 2023, no. 6221
  Since the arbitration clause is not an ancillary covenant of the contract in which it is inserted, since it has individuality and autonomy, clearly distinct from that of the contract to which it accedes, disputes arising after the termination of the contract also fall within its scope of application when they are dependent on prior facts.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 2 March 2023, no. 6327
  The provision in Article 829.11 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be interpreted as meaning that, for the purposes of the hypothesis of nullity provided for therein, the contradiction must emerge between the different components of the operative part, and not also between different parts of the grounds compared with each other, or between the grounds themselves and the operative part.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 3 March 2023, no. 6501
  The sole purpose of an appeal against an arbitral award is to ascertain the legitimacy of the decision rendered by the arbitrators, not to review the substantive issues submitted to them, so that the findings of fact made by the arbitrators cannot be censured in an appeal against the award, unless the reasoning on this point is completely lacking or absolutely deficient.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 3 March 2023, no. 6518
  The sole purpose of an appeal against an arbitral award is to verify the legitimacy of the decision rendered by the arbitrators, not to review the substantive issues submitted to them, so that the findings of fact made by the arbitrators cannot be censured in an appeal against the award, unless the reasons on this point are completely lacking or absolutely deficient.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 6 March 2023, no. 6550
  The defect of contradictory reasoning in the grounds of their arbitration award may be challenged on the ground of nullity only when it takes the form of an irreconcilability between parts of the operative part (Article 829(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure) or a contrast between parts of the grounds that is so serious as to make it impossible to reconstruct the ratio decidendi, resulting in a substantial lack of the grounds themselves.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 10 March 2023, no. 7201
  If the arbitration clause under common law was concluded before the entry into force of Legislative Decree 40/2006, the former text of Article 829(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure applies, under which an appeal against the award is permitted, unless the parties have authorised the arbitrators to rule in equity or have declared the award non-appealable. In such a case, however, it is possible to raise or object to errores in iudicando, since the provision of non-appealability precludes only exceptions on the merits, but not also procedural exceptions relating to the invalidity of the clause.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 14 March 2023, no. 7335
  The defect relating to the invalid or irregular constitution of the arbitration panel (also constituted as required by law), arising from the fact that the appointment was made in breach of the methods and forms set forth in Chapters I and II of Title VIII of Book IV of the Civil Code, is not to be ascribed to article 158 of the Code of Civil Procedure, relating to the defect in the constitution of the judge, but to the nullities provided for by article 829, para. 1, no. 2, of the Code of Civil Procedure, inasmuch as the arbitral award, which constitutes a decision for the resolution of the dispute on a private-sector level, cannot in any way approach a jurisdictional dictum; this character was accentuated by law 25/1994, without the amendments made by article 819-ter of the code of civil procedure, introduced by legislative decree 40/2006, leading to a different reconstructive line of the institution.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 15 March 2023, no. 7433
  Compliance with the formal criteria for drawing up financial statements meets supra-individual requirements of a general nature, and their breach means that the dispute in question concerns non-transferable rights, which are outside the scope of arbitration.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 15 March 2023, no. 7546
  The so called favor arbitratis, inferred from Art. 808-quater of the Code of Civil Procedure, refers only to cases in which the doubt of interpretation concerns the subject matter of the matter assigned to the arbitrators by the relevant agreement and not the parties’ choice of arbitration itself.
• Supreme Court, Sec. I Civ., 17 March 2023, no. 7867
  The mere expiry of the time limit for the pronouncement of the award is not, in itself, sufficient to determine its nullity; it is necessary, pursuant to Article 821 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a manifestation of the will to assert the forfeiture of the arbitrators’ power to decide the merits of the dispute submitted to them.
• Supreme Court, Sec. I Civ., 28 March 2023, no. 8760
  In the appeal in cassation against the judgment deciding on the appeal against an arbitral award, where it is necessary to verify whether the judgment itself is adequately and correctly motivated in relation to the reasons for challenging the award, the review of legitimacy must be carried out exclusively by checking the conformity with the law and the congruity of the motivation of the judgment deciding on the appeal against the award.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 28 March 2023, no. 8767
  Defective statement of reasons, as a defect falling under Article 829(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, in relation to Article 823(3) of the same code, can be recognised only when the grounds of the award are completely lacking or are so deficient as not to allow the identification of the rationale of the decision taken or, in other words, to denote an argumentative process that is absolutely unacceptable on a dialectical level, so as to result in a non-motivation.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 5 April 2023, no. 9395
  In the matter of corporate arbitration, where the parties have authorised the arbitrators to decide according to equity, an appeal against the arbitral decision on the ground of errores in iudicando is not permitted, unless it relates to non-compromissible matters or to the validity of shareholders’ meeting resolutions, regardless of whether the arbitration clause was inserted before or after the 2006 reform, since it is irrelevant that ratione temporis art. 36 of Legislative Decree 5/2003 refers to the text of Article 829, para. 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure, resulting from legislative decree 40/2006, or to Article 829(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure in its previous wording.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 5 April 2023, no. 9434
  A challenge to corporate resolutions concerning share capital transactions, whether for the purpose of an increase or reduction, is arbitrable where, on the basis of the prospects offered by the parties, the corresponding dispute does not directly and not merely mediately affect the interests – of the shareholders of the shareholders, of the company or of third parties outside the company – that are protected by mandatory rules, the violation of which determines a reaction of the legal system that is not dependent on any initiative of the parties, otherwise the (substantive) mandatory rights protected by a specific rule regulating them would be devolved to the arbitrators.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 6 April 2023, no. 9510
  On the subject of arbitration, the obligation to summarise the grounds for the decision imposed on arbitrators by Article 823(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the non-fulfilment of which integrates the possibility of challenging the award pursuant to Article 829(1)(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, may be considered as not satisfied only when the reasoning is completely lacking or is so deficient as to make it impossible to understand the logic behind the arbitral decision or contains irreconcilable contradictions in the body of the reasoning or the operative part such as to render the ratio of the decision incomprehensible.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 14 April 2023, no. 10021
  Defective statement of reasons, as a defect falling under Art. 829 no. 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in relation to Art. 823 no. 3 of the same code, can only be recognised when the grounds of the award are completely lacking or are so deficient as not to allow the identification of the rationale of the decision adopted or, in other words, to denote an argumentative process that is absolutely unacceptable on a dialectical level, so as to result in a non-motivation.
• Supreme Court, Sec. I Civ., 18 April 2023, no. 10303
  The sole purpose of an appeal against an arbitral award is to verify the legitimacy of the decision.  Therefore, the findings of fact made by the arbitrators, such as those concerning the interpretation of the contract at issue, cannot be censured in an appeal against the award, with the sole exception of the case in which the grounds of the award are completely lacking or absolutely deficient.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 18 April 2023, no. 10319
  Article 829(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, as reworded by Article 24 of Legislative Decree 40/2006, applies, pursuant to the transitional provision in Article 27 of the same decree, to all arbitration proceedings brought after the entry into force of the reform (2 March 2006). However, in order to establish whether such an appeal is admissible, the law, to which article 829.3 of the Code of Civil Procedure refers, must be identified as the law in force at the time the arbitration agreement was entered into.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 19 April 2023, no. 10444
  The system outlined by the combined provisions of arts. 821 and 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in the formulation prior to the amendments introduced by legislative decree 2 February 2006, no. 40 of 2 February 2006, describes, with reference to the pronouncement of the award after the time limit, a relative nullity, in the sense that the lapse of the time limit cannot be invoked as a cause of nullity of the award if the party, before the award is pronounced, has not notified the other parties and the arbitrators of its intention to invoke their forfeiture, thus disposing of the nullity; such notification, therefore, is not a mere exception to be proposed in the arbitration proceedings, but an essential act, in default of which the nullity of the award can be defect of which the nullity of the award cannot be enforced.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 3 May 2023, no. 11497
  The statutory provision that a decision affirming or denying the jurisdiction of the ordinary court in the presence of an arbitration clause may be challenged by means of a regulation of jurisdiction implies that any flaw in the decision adopted must be denounced by the prescribed procedural means.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 3 May 2023, no. 11506
  In the appeal for cassation against the judgement ruling on the appeal for nullity of the arbitral award, the Supreme Court cannot directly examine the arbitrators’ decision, but only the judgement issued in the appeal proceedings, in order to verify whether it is adequately and correctly motivated in relation to the aspects of the award that are contested, with the result that the review of legitimacy must be conducted exclusively through the verification of the conformity with the law and the congruity of the grounds of the judgement rendered on appeal.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 18 May 2023, no. 13735
  The effectiveness of an arbitration clause, as a vexatious clause, is subject to specific approval in writing only in cases where the arbitration clause is included in contracts with general terms and conditions drafted by only one of the parties to the contract (Art. 1341(1) of the Civil Code) or concluded by signing forms or forms (Art. 1342(1) of the Civil Code), not when the clause is contained in the articles of association or regulations of a social body in which the party is a member.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 18 May 2023, no. 13755
  Para. 1 of Art. 832 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the arbitration agreement may refer to a pre-established arbitration regulation, with the result that the parties have the normative power to regulate the proceedings precisely by referring to a pre-established regulation.
  The effectiveness of the arbitration clause, as a vexatious clause, is subject to specific approval in writing only in cases where such a clause is inserted in contracts with general terms and conditions prepared by only one of the parties or concluded by signing forms or forms, not when the clause is contained in the bylaws or rules of a corporate body in which the party is a member.
• Supreme Court, III Civil Division, 23 May 2023, no. 14186
  The objection of compromise for foreign arbitrators integrates a question of jurisdiction, with the consequence that the judgement upholding it can be challenged with the appeal and not with the regulation of jurisdiction pursuant to art. 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 1 June 2023, no. 15521
  In arbitration proceedings, the failure to observe the principle of cross-examination is not a formal defect, but a defect of activity; thus, for the purposes of nullity of the award, it is always necessary to ascertain the concrete impairment of the right of defence, taking into account the manner in which the parties were confronted (having regard to their respective claims) and the possibilities for them to exercise on an equal footing the procedural faculties attributed to them.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 5 June 2023, no. 15668
  In corporate arbitration, in order to establish whether an appeal against the arbitral award for errors of law is admissible, it is necessary to refer to the corporate arbitration clause included in the articles of association, depending on whether the clause is a clause that predates or postdates Legislative Decree 40/2006.
• Supreme Court, Sec. I Civ., 5 June 2023, no. 15700
  An arbitration clause contained in a company’s articles of association that does not comply with the requirement of Article 34 of Legislative Decree No. 5 of 17 January 2003 and does not provide that the arbitrators must be appointed by a person outside the company is null and void, regardless of the type of arbitration.
• Supreme Court, III Civil Division, 8 June 2023, no. 16364
  An action to ascertain the usurious nature of the interest due under a leasing contract, with the consequent order of the counterparty to repay the amount unduly received under such title, may be referred to the arbitrators’ decision, since it concerns a disposable right, and the alleged nullity of the contract on which the claim is based, which instead concerns the merits of the claim, is not sufficient to exclude arbitration jurisdiction, since it is illogical to make the operation of the arbitration agreement dependent on the decision on the merits of the dispute.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 12 June 2023, no. 16615
  Neither the subordinate submission of a counterclaim nor the request to grant time limits for a full articulation of evidence constitutes conduct incompatible with the intention to avail oneself of the arbitration clause exception.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 22 June 2023, no. 17902
  For the purposes of identifying the means by which an award is to be challenged, what matters is the nature of the act actually performed by the arbitrators, rather than the nature of the arbitration as envisaged by the parties; therefore, if an award has been pronounced despite the fact that the parties had envisaged an informal arbitration, it follows that that award can be challenged only pursuant to arts. 827 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 26 June 2023, no. 18220
  The arbitrator’s incompatibility, even if the petition for objection has been disregarded, can still be deduced as a ground for nullity of the award.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 30 June 2023, no. 18579
  The requirement of written form for the valid conclusion of an arbitration clause does not presuppose that the will of the parties must be expressed in a single document signed by both parties at the same time; it may also be achieved by the exchange of letters respectively containing the proposal and the acceptance of the referral of the dispute to arbitrators.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 30 June 2023, no. 18601
  The manifestation of the willingness to accept the appointment need not be sacramental in form or necessarily appear from a specific document, it being sufficient that it emerges, albeit by implication, from an act – such as the minutes of the first meeting – which, by formalising the constitution of the panel of judges for the purpose of deciding the dispute, clearly postulates that the appointment as arbitrator is accepted from that moment, where such acceptance has not already taken place by means of a written declaration.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 4 July 2023, no. 18772
  Arbitrators are in breach of the principle of cross-examination if they have declared a party forfeited for the late exercise of the right to submit questions and requests for preliminary enquiries, or to produce documents, where the possibility of declining to do so was not provided for in the arbitration agreement, or in a separate written document or in the procedural rules drawn up by them, and in the absence of a specific warning in this regard at the time the time the time limits were granted.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 5 July 2023, no. 18973
  An arbitration clause contained in a particular contract does not extend its effects to disputes relating to another contract, even if it is connected to the allegedly main one.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 10 July 2023, no. 19497
  The requirement of written form – with regard to arbitration clauses per relationem, i.e., those provided for in a different shop or document to which the contract makes reference – is satisfied when the reference, contained in the contract, provides for an express and specific reference to the arbitration clause and not, on the contrary, when the reference is generic, simply referring to the document or form containing the clause itself, since only the express reference ensures the full awareness of the parties as to the derogation from jurisdiction.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 14 July 2023, no. 20209
  On the subject of an appeal against an award for breach of the rules of law on the merits of the dispute, Article 829(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, as reformulated by Article 24 of Legislative Decree No. 40/2006, applies, pursuant to the transitional provision in Article 27 of the same decree, to all arbitral proceedings instituted after the entry into force of the new provision (2 March 2006). However, in order to establish whether such an appeal is admissible, the law, to which article 829, para. 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure refers, must be identified as the law in force at the time the arbitration agreement was entered into, so that, in the case of arbitration proceedings commenced after the entry into force of the new rules – but under an agreement entered into before – in the silence of the parties, article 829, para. 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable. 829(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure as it stood at the time, which allowed an appeal against the award for violation of the rules on the merits, unless the parties themselves had authorised the arbitrators to rule in equity or had declared the award non-appealable.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 14 July 2023, no. 20441
  The first sentence of article 819-ter, para. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in providing that the jurisdiction of arbitrators is not excluded by the connection between the dispute referred to them and a case pending before an ordinary court, implies, with reference to the hypothesis that a plurality of claims has been submitted, that the existence of arbitral jurisdiction must be verified with specific reference to each of them, since the entire dispute cannot be referred to arbitrators – or to the ordinary courts – by virtue of the mere connection.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 19 July 2023, no. 21329
  The referral to arbitrators of any dispute in any way connected with the interpretation and execution of the condominium rules determines, therefore, the arbitral competence also for the opposition to the injunction ordered by the administrator for the collection of the contributions approved by the assembly, pursuant to articles 1130, no. 3, of the Civil Code and 63, para. 1, disp. att. of the Civil Code, as the arbitration clause does not constitute a derogation from these rules, since the presence of the arbitration agreement itself does not prevent the condominium owner from requesting and obtaining an injunction for costs from the ordinary court (without prejudice to the right of the enjoined condominium owner to object to the arbitration jurisdiction in the opposition), nor does the above-mentioned art. 63(1) does not reserve absolute and exclusive jurisdiction to the ordinary courts and therefore does not prevent the relative disputes from being submitted to arbitration, which, moreover, do not fall under any of the prohibitions sanctioned by articles 806 and 808 of the code of civil procedure.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 19 July 2023, no. 21450
  Although it takes place before the Court of Appeal, an appeal against an arbitral award does not have the consistency of a revision prioris instantiae and therefore does not constitute a reiteration in second instance of the proceedings before the arbitrators, at the outcome of which, as in an ordinary appeal, the decision-maker is allowed to review the merits of the decision taken by the arbitrators, replacing it, in the event of reform, with his own.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 26 July 2023, no. 22601
  The decision of the Justice of the Peace who has declined jurisdiction in favour of the arbitrators is subject to appeal before the Tribunal, since the regulation of jurisdiction against the decisions of the Justice of the Peace is prohibited.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 26 July 2023, no. 22631
  The activity of the arbitrators is of a jurisdictional nature and substitutes the function of the ordinary judge, so that the determination of whether a dispute falls within the jurisdiction of the former or of the latter is a question of jurisdiction, so that where the declining of jurisdiction in favour of the ordinary judge made in relation to a judgement is not challenged, the resulting judgement formed on the point precludes any discussion on the point with reference to identical actions that may be brought subsequently.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 27 July 2023, no. 22893
  The submission of the objection of devolution of the dispute to arbitrators at the same time as the counterclaim in the statement of defence does not imply the need to expressly subordinate the latter to the rejection of the former, in order to prevent it from being deemed waived, since the examination of the counterclaim is ontologically conditional on the non-acceptance of the objection of compromise, the merits of the latter being incompatible with the examination of the former.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 4 August 2023, no. 23875
  On the subject of arbitration according to ritual, a mere procedural ruling does not exhaust the arbitrators’ potestas iudicandi, which is based on the validity and effectiveness of the arbitration agreement, and therefore does not preclude the institution of new proceedings having the same object, since the same general principle applies in arbitral justice, which replaces ordinary justice, by virtue of which the parties are entitled to obtain a decision on the merits where this is legally possible.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 7 August 2023, no. 23974
  On the subject of arbitration, for the purposes of verifying the fulfilment of the purpose of the act containing an invitation to the opponent to designate its arbitrators, made known without complying with the forms provided for the service of documents in civil proceedings, the court is called upon to ascertain not only that the act was brought to the knowledge of the addressee, but also that such knowledge occurred in sufficient time to enable the latter to exercise its right to choose its arbitrator.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 7 August 2023, no. 23984
  Arbitrators may decide the dispute even though other proceedings on the same (or related) facts are pending before the judicial authority (art. 819-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure) and, even in these cases of identity or connection with the litigation before the courts, the hypotheses of suspension of the arbitral proceedings are confined to the realm of residuality (art. 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure). There is no reason to differentiate this discipline peculiar to arbitration in the case where the proceedings concerning the same facts are pending not before the civil court but before the criminal court, before which the civil action is also brought following the constitution of the civil party.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 9 August 2023, no. 24271
  With regard to the appeal against arbitral awards, the unification of the rescinding phase and the rescissory phase does not constitute grounds for nullity of the entire proceedings, if the judge has kept the two phases logically, legally and conceptually distinct and, after ruling on the nullity, has examined the conclusions on the merits, duly specified by the parties, and considered that he could pronounce the final decision on the basis of the evidence already acquired in the arbitration process and the findings made by the arbitrators.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 11 August 2023, no. 24529
  The 2006 reform legislature intervened by placing ritual arbitration within the jurisdictional circuit, with the consequence that the allocation of business between judges and (ritual) arbitrators is a matter of jurisdiction that may be challenged by regulation. On the contrary, irritual arbitration continues to remain outside the jurisdictional system, and the relative exception must continue to be considered a genuine exception of merit.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 1 September 2023, no. 25594
  In order for the defect referred to in Article 829(1)(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure to exist, it is necessary for the grounds of the award to be completely absent or to be so deficient as not to allow the rationale of the decision to be identified or, in other words, to denote an argumentative process that is absolutely unacceptable on a dialectical level, so as to result in the lack of the requirement of Article 823(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 7 September 2023, no. 26128
  An appeal against the court’s decision declining jurisdiction in favour of the arbitrators must be considered inadmissible, since the latter’s activity has a jurisdictional nature and substitutes the function of the ordinary judge, so that the relative question can only be raised by way of regulation of jurisdiction.
  For the purposes of being challenged by the regulation of jurisdiction, the qualification given by the court to its ruling is irrelevant: therefore, the sentence by which the court, ignoring the qualification of the jurisdiction relationship between arbitrators and judicial authorities, given by article 819-ter of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, declares the application inadmissible, must be understood as a ruling declining jurisdiction in favour of the arbitrators and is therefore challengeable with the necessary regulation of jurisdiction.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 18 September 2023, no. 26756
  In arbitration proceedings, the identification of the actual content of the questions posed by the parties and the appreciation of their real scope, postulating the identification and qualification of the goods of life intended to form the subject-matter of the requested measure (petitum), as well as of the elements of the case from which the claims asserted in the action derive (causa petendi) constitutes an operation falling within the remit of the arbitrators, the outcome of which may be reviewed in an appeal against the award only within the limits of the judgment of legitimacy, i.e. only with reference to the reasons given in support of the hermeneutic result arrived at by the arbitrators as judges entrusted with the merits of the dispute.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 18 September 2023, no. 26765
  Article 817 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that a party that does not object to the lack of jurisdiction of the arbitrators in the first defence following the acceptance of the arbitrators due to the non-existence, invalidity or ineffectiveness of the arbitration agreement may not challenge the award on this ground, except in the case of a non-arbitrable dispute; while art. 829(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that a party who has not objected in the first subsequent application or defence to a violation of a rule governing the conduct of arbitration proceedings may not challenge the award on this ground.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 19 September 2023, no. 26784
  Insofar as it aims to consolidate the independence of arbitrators, through the provision of the designator’s third party status, the rule in Article 34 of Legislative Decree 5/2003 aims to ensure the impartiality of the decision, which is in line with a principle of public order.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 19 September 2023, no. 26788
  The Court of Cassation is never the judge of the material fact, much less can it be so where the appellate court is already precluded from examining the merits, given that in an appeal for nullity of the award pursuant to art. 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure the rule of specificity of the wording of the grounds applies.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 19 September 2023, no. 26792
  In the appeal proceedings against an arbitral award, the interpretation of the scope and content of the contested award constitutes a typical factual enquiry, reserved to the judge of the merits, the result of which may be reviewed in the court of legitimacy only for breach of the canons of hermeneutics, which the appellant has the duty to indicate specifically, or by flawed reasoning, which can only be found in the event that the reasoning is lacking altogether or is merely apparent, or is affected by logical contradictions such as to make it impossible to identify or understand the rationale behind the decision.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 19 September 2023, no. 26839
  The review of legitimacy that can be carried out in relation to the judgment deciding on the appeal of the award, far from being able to re-examine the arbitral response, which is in fact already precluded at the rescinding stage, is exercised solely on the ruling adopted by the Court of Appeal for the sole purpose of ascertaining its conformity with the law and the congruity of the grounds.
• Supreme Court, III Civil Division, 2 October 2023, no. 27707
  The arbitration clause contained in a particular contract is not capable of conferring on the arbitrators cognisance over the obligations arising from the settlement contract, whereby the former has been consensually terminated and the relationship between the parties has been otherwise regulated without referring to it, inasmuch as the principle of the autonomy of the arbitration clause with respect to the agreement in which it was inserted entails its extension only to the causes of invalidity of the latter, provided that they are not external to it, while it excludes its ultratractivity with respect to relations arising from subsequent agreements, not even indirectly mentioned in the clause itself and of which the previous agreement now constitutes a mere historical antecedent.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 9 October 2023, no. 28291
  The institution of ratification is certainly also applicable to the arbitration clause (in itself valid, albeit ineffective) inserted in a contract by a person who did not have the right to do so, and to the contrary the principle of the autonomy of the arbitration clause cannot be invoked, which is applied to exclude the extension to it of the causes of invalidity of the transaction in which it is inserted, and not to support a partial ratification of the contract concluded by the falsus procurator, the admissibility of which is as a rule excluded by both case law and doctrine.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 9 October 2023, no. 28293
  The institution of ratification is certainly also applicable to the arbitration clause (in itself valid, albeit ineffective) inserted in a contract by a person who did not have the right to do so, and to the contrary the principle of the autonomy of the arbitration clause cannot be invoked, which is applied to exclude the extension to it of the causes of invalidity of the transaction in which it is inserted, and not to support a partial ratification of the contract concluded by the falsus procurator, the admissibility of which is as a rule excluded both in case law and in doctrine.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 12 October 2023, no. 28468
  Faced with a contractual clause contemplating the possibility of resorting to an arbitration panel as an alternative to recourse to state justice, in the absence of an exclusive intention to devolve to arbitrators the disputes arising from a contract, it is correct to affirm the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts and such an interpretation does not conflict with the provision set forth in Art. 808-quater of the Code of Civil Procedure, which refers only to cases in which the interpretative doubt arises on the quantification of the matter devolved to the arbitrators by the relevant agreement and not also on the arbitration choice made by the parties.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 12 October 2023, no. 28468
  Faced with a contractual clause contemplating the possibility of resorting to an arbitration panel as an alternative to recourse to state justice, in the absence of an exclusive intention to devolve to arbitrators the disputes arising from a contract, it is correct to affirm the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts and such an interpretation does not conflict with the provision set forth in Art. 808-quater of the Code of Civil Procedure, which refers only to cases in which the interpretative doubt arises on the quantification of the matter devolved to the arbitrators by the relevant agreement and not also on the arbitration choice made by the parties.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 13 November 2023, no. 31534 
  Even in the event of a dispute being referred to an arbitration panel, the defect of potestas iudicandi of the deciding panel, in order for the arbitration agreement to be null and void, must be objected to in the first defence following the acceptance of the arbitrators, so that, failing this, the alleged invalidity degrades to a sanctionable nullity.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 28 November 2023, no. 33009
  The decision of the ordinary judge that affirms or denies the existence or validity of an informal arbitration and that therefore, in the first case, does not rule on the dispute by declaring that the informal arbitration must take place and, in the second case, declares that the decision of the ordinary judge may take place, is not subject to appeal with the regulation of jurisdiction, since the agreement of the informal arbitration determines the inapplicability of all the rules dictated for the usual arbitration, including article 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Supreme Court, II Civil Division, 30 November 2023, no. 33443
  The decision of the ordinary judge that affirms or denies the existence or the validity of an informal arbitration and that therefore, in the first case, does not rule on the dispute declaring that the informal arbitration must take place and, in the second case, declares that the decision of the ordinary judge may take place, is not subject to appeal with the regulation of jurisdiction, since the agreement of the informal arbitration determines the inapplicability of all the rules dictated for the regular arbitration, including article 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 5 December 2023, no. 33921
  If the parties have not determined, in the compromise or arbitration clause, the procedural rules to be adopted, the arbitrators shall be free to regulate the structure of the proceedings as they see fit, even departing from the provisions dictated by the Code of Civil Procedure, with the sole limitation of compliance with the mandatory principle of cross-examination, laid down by Article 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which, however, must be suitably adapted to the arbitration proceedings, in the sense that the parties must be offered, in order to allow them to adequately defend themselves, the opportunity to set out their respective assumptions, to examine and analyse the evidence and the results of the proceedings, even after the preliminary investigation has been completed and up to the time of the close of the hearing, and to submit pleadings and replies and to be informed in good time of the opposing requests and claims.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 11 December 2023, no. 34473
  In arbitration proceedings, the failure to observe the principle of cross-examination (enshrined in Art. 816-bis, para. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and previously referred to in Art. 816 of the Code of Civil Procedure) is not a formal defect, but one of activity. It follows that, for the purposes of the declaration of nullity, it is necessary to ascertain the concrete impairment of the right of defence, taking into account the manner in which the parties were confronted (having regard to their respective claims) and the possibility for them to exercise, in compliance with the rule audiatur et altera pars, on an equal footing the procedural faculties attributed to them.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 12 December 2023, no. 34607
  In the case of arbitration proceedings, the very source of the power to refer to the private court lies in the arbitration clause, which, for bankruptcy purposes, is ancillary to the contract in which it is included, with the consequence that, in the event of the dissolution of the underlying contract pursuant to article 72 of the bankruptcy law, the arbitration clause also ceasing to exist, the arbitration proceedings also do not survive, due to the effect of the loss of the arbitrators’ power to decide the dispute.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 12 December 2023, no. 34706
  A partial award is immediately appealable only where, by deciding one or more claims, it has defined the judgment in respect of them, whereas immediate appealability must be excluded where the award has decided preliminary questions of substance without defining the judgment.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 12 December 2023, no. 34819
  In the event of a company’s bankruptcy, the arbitration clause contained in the company’s articles of association is not applicable to the liability action brought by the receiver against the directors pursuant to Article 146 of the bankruptcy law.
• Supreme Court, I Civil Division, 13 December 2023, no. 34954
  A partial award is immediately appealable, pursuant to section 827(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, only if, by deciding one or more claims, it has defined the judgment in respect of those claims, given the enforceability that the award may assume in this hypothesis; conversely, immediate appealability must be excluded when the award has decided preliminary issues on the merits without defining the judgment.

Courts of Appeal

• Court of Appeal of Florence, 5 January 2023, no. 21
  The use of a modal regent verb does not infer the mere optionality, and therefore the non-compulsoriness, of arbitration as a means of settling future disputes between the parties.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 9 January 2023, no. 93
  The control exercised by the judge in the rescinding phase of the appeal for nullity of the arbitral award pursuant to art. 829 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure is entirely similar to that of the cassation proceedings and is aimed at ascertaining that the arbitrators have logically assessed the facts of the case and congruously motivated their decision.
• Court of Appeal of Messina, 12 January 2023, no. 18
  The activity of the ritual arbitrators is of a jurisdictional nature and substitutes the function of the ordinary judge, so that the determination of whether a dispute falls within the jurisdiction of the former or the latter is a question of jurisdiction, whereas the determination of whether a dispute falls within the jurisdiction of the ordinary judge and, in that context, within the substituted jurisdiction of the ritual arbitrators, or within the jurisdiction of the administrative or accounting judge, gives rise to a question of jurisdiction; Therefore, the question as to whether the dispute cannot be settled by arbitrators, since it is reserved to the jurisdiction of the administrative court, constitutes a question of jurisdiction which, if it arises, the judge challenging the arbitral award is required to examine and decide also ex officio.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 18 January 2023, no. 141
  The defect of failure to state reasons referred to in Article 829, para. 1, no. 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure can be recognised only in those cases where the grounds of the award are completely non-existent or are so deficient as not to allow the ratio of the decision to be identified, or when they are characterised by the choice of an argumentative procedure that is absolutely unacceptable on a dialectical level, resulting in a sort of non-motivation.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 20 January 2023, no. 218
  The principle, inferable from Art. 336, para. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, also applies to the appeal for nullity of the arbitral award, according to which the reform, even partial, of the first-instance ruling has an effect on the parties dependent on the reformed party – the so-called internal expansive effect – and therefore determines the annulment of the section that ruled on the costs of the dispute; it follows that the appellate court has the power-duty to totally renew, even ex officio, the regulation of such costs, in the light of the final outcome of the case.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 20 January 2023, no. 222
  In the case of public contracts, between the provision that excludes recourse to arbitration, contained in the tender notice, and the provision that instead provides for an arbitration agreement, contained in the special specifications, the former must be deemed to prevail.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 24 January 2023, no. 218
  The review of the compatibility of the award with domestic law must concern not the merits of the measure or its reasoning, but rather the operative part of the arbitral decision. Certainly, the preceptive content of the operative part can be identified and filled with meaning through the examination of the expositive and motivating part of the award for the purpose of the conclusive scrutiny of whether the decisum is contrary to public policy, but this does not mean that the competent court’s review may result in a control of the motivation of the measure.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 24 January 2023, no. 498
  The defect of failure to state reasons referred to in Article 829, para. 1, no. 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure can be recognised only in those cases where the grounds of the award are completely non-existent or are so deficient as not to allow the ratio of the decision to be identified, or when they are characterised by the choice of an argumentative procedure that is absolutely unacceptable on a dialectical level, resulting in a sort of non-motivation.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 27 January 2023, no. 640
  In the case of an appeal for nullity of an arbitration award, which is subject to binding criticism and may be brought within the limits established by article 829 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, the rule of specificity in the wording of the grounds applies, given its rescinding nature and the need to allow the judge, and the other party, to verify whether the objections put forward correspond exactly to those that can be formulated according to the above-mentioned rule.
• Court of Appeal of Lecce, 1 February 2023, no. 119
  Arbitrators are in breach of the principle of cross-examination if they have determined the peremptory nature of the time limits set by them to the parties for submissions and preliminary enquiries and, in connection with such determination, have declared a party forfeited for the late exercise of the right to submit submissions and preliminary enquiries, without the arbitration agreement, or a separate written deed or the rules of procedure drawn up by the arbitrators themselves, providing for the possibility of setting peremptory time limits for the conduct of the defence and without a specific warning as to the peremptory nature of the time limits at the time of their assignment.
• Court of Appeal Catanzaro, 2 February 2023, no. 107
  The reference to the public policy clause in Article 829(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure must be interpreted as a reference to the fundamental and binding rules of the system and does not imply an attenuated notion of public policy, which includes all existing mandatory rules.
• Court of Appeal of Salerno, 2 February 2023, no. 110
  The nullity of the award on the ground of inconsistency is configurable, pursuant to Article 829(1)(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, when the different components of the operative part are irreconcilable with each other to the point of making it materially unenforceable or there is a contrast between the grounds and the operative part that results in the impossibility of understanding the ratio decidendi of the arbitral ruling.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 2 February 2023, no. 790
  Since the parties cannot use the procedure provided for by article 814 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, they must necessarily resort to ordinary proceedings, to be instituted by a writ of summons, in order to obtain a title that is valid against all the parties to the arbitration proceedings.
  If the dispute is referred to a board of arbitrators, the value of the dispute, which is relevant for the purpose of determining the arbitrators’ fees, is determined a priori on the basis of the petitum, and a ruling by the board of arbitrators that the claim is inadmissible or inadmissible can have no effect, given that a hypothetical criterion for determining the value of the case ex post on the basis of the concrete decisum would be contrary to the rules laid down in the code of civil procedure.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 6 February 2023, no. 891
  The compromise clause does not preclude the issuance of an injunction decree because the resulting lack of jurisdiction relates to the cognizance of a dispute and, therefore, presupposes cross-examination, which is absent in the monitoring proceedings, and because the exception of compromise is optional and cannot be detected ex officio. Therefore, once a party has decided not to resort to the arbitration procedure and has decided to activate the summary procedure, the same party cannot, once the opposition to the injunction has been filed, object to the lack of jurisdiction of the Ordinary Judicial Authority that it has brought before it.
• Court of Appeal Milan, 17 February 2023, no. 559
  On the subject of arbitration proceedings, the question of the breach of cross-examination does not have to be examined from a formal point of view. Therefore, an arbitral award pronounced pursuant to the Rules of the Chamber of Arbitration of Milan cannot be declared null and void without granting time limits for filing final defence briefs or setting a hearing for discussion, time limits and hearing that under the said Rules are only optional.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 21 February 2023, no. 586
  The principle set forth in Article 2697 of the Italian Civil Code, concerning the identification of the party bearing the burden of proof, is not a principle of public policy, and therefore its alleged violation is not a ground for invalidation of the award.
  It represents an abuse of process, punishable pursuant to Article 96(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, when the party attempts to ask the State Judge for a decision on the merits of the disputed matter by challenging the award, disguising as grounds for the nullity of the award what are clearly disputes on the merits.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 24 February 2023, no. 1388
  Where the arbitration clause contained in the bylaws of an association provides that the third arbitrator, in case of disagreement between the two appointed by the parties, shall be appointed by an association body, it is null and void.
• Court of Appeal of Salerno, 24 February 2023, no. 265
  On the subject of arbitration, the devolution of the dispute to the arbitrators being configured as a waiver of state jurisdiction, through the choice of a solution to the dispute by means of an instrument of a private nature, the relative exception must be considered proper or in the strict sense, inasmuch as its object is the presentation of a fact preventing the exercise of state jurisdiction, with the consequence that it must be proposed by the parties in the time and manner proper to exceptions of merit that cannot be raised ex officio.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 28 February 2023, no. 457
  The verification of compatibility with the principles of international public order must concern exclusively the effects that the act is intended to produce in the Italian legal system and not also the conformity with domestic law of the foreign law on which the decision is based, nor is any review of the legal correctness of the solution adopted permitted, since the content of the measure whose recognition is sought is excluded.
  The principles of public order are to be identified in the fundamental principles of our Constitution or in those other rules that, although they do not find a place in it, respond to the universal need to protect fundamental human rights, or that inform the entire system in such a way that their violation results in a distortion of the founding values of the entire system.
• Court of Appeal of Palermo, 6 March 2023, no. 462
  On the subject of appealing against an arbitral award, the defect of reasoning, as a defect falling under Article 829(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, in relation to Article 823(5) of the same code, can only be recognised when the grounds of the award are completely lacking or are so deficient as not to allow the identification of the ratio of the decision adopted or, in other words, to denote an argumentative process that is absolutely unacceptable on a dialectical level, so as to result in a lack of reasoning.
• Court of Appeal of Brescia, 8 March 2023, no. 392
  On the subject of appealing against an arbitral award, the defect of reasoning, as a defect falling under Article 829(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, in relation to Article 823(5) of the same code, can only be recognised when the grounds of the award are completely lacking or are so deficient as not to allow the identification of the rationale of the decision adopted or, in other words, to denote an argumentative process that is absolutely unacceptable at the dialectical level, so as to result in a failure to state reasons.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 10 March 2023, no. 846
  The dispute concerning the exclusion of a partner of a partnership with only two partners may be submitted to arbitration, as the exclusion ruling is independent from the possible dissolution of the partnership pursuant to Article 2287 of the Italian Civil Code (the latter being subject to the mandatory jurisdiction of the State Court).
• Court of Appeal of Brescia, 21 March 2023, no. 490
  In the case of a company incorporated after the reform pursuant to Legislative Decree No. 40 of 2 February 2006, an appeal against an award rendered on the basis of a statutory arbitration clause may also concern the alleged violation of rules of law applicable to the merits of the dispute only if the arbitral tribunal to decide the matter has been aware of non-compromissible issues or when the subject-matter of the proceedings is the validity of shareholders’ meeting resolutions.
• Court of Appeal of Catanzaro, 21 March 2023, no. 360
  Article 1341 of the Italian Civil Code requires the specific written approval of vexatious or onerous clauses only in the case of a contract by adhesion, i.e. when the clauses are unilaterally prepared by only one party.
• Court of Appeal of Catanzaro, 21 March 2023, no. 362
  Since the devolution of the dispute to the arbitrators is configured as a waiver of state jurisdiction, through the choice of a solution to the dispute by means of an instrument of a private nature, the related objection must be considered proper or in the strict sense, as it concerns the presentation of a fact preventing the exercise of state jurisdiction, with the consequence that it must be proposed by the parties in the time and manner proper to exceptions on the merits that cannot be raised ex officio.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 28 March 2023, no. 2282
  The arbitration clause that refers generically to disputes arising from the contract to which it relates shall be interpreted, in the absence of express will to the contrary, as meaning that all and only disputes having causa petendi in the contract itself fall within the jurisdiction of arbitration, with the exclusion of those that have, in it, only a historical premise.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 30 March 2023, no. 1105
  Article 829(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure provides for the nullity of an award not for every case of mere contradiction between the various points of the grounds or their insufficiency, but only when there is a contradiction between the various statements of the operative part, or a contradiction between the grounds and the operative part that results in the impossibility of understanding the ratio decidendi of the decision, equivalent to a substantial absolute lack of grounds.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 31 March 2023, no. 1507
  The first sentence of article 819-ter, para. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in providing that the jurisdiction of arbitrators is not excluded by the connection between the dispute referred to them and a case pending before an ordinary court, implies, with reference to the hypothesis in which a plurality of claims has been submitted, that the existence of arbitral jurisdiction must be verified with specific reference to each of them, since the entire dispute cannot be referred to arbitrators (or to the ordinary court) by virtue of the mere connection.
• Court of Appeal of Perugia, 3 April 2023, no. 239
  In the case of informal arbitration, the violation of the principle of cross-examination does not arise as a defect of the proceedings, but as a breach of the mandate contract and can only be relevant for the purposes of an appeal pursuant to article 1429 of the Italian civil code. Consequently, the party challenging the award must bear the burden of proving, in concreto, the error in the appreciation of the reality in which it is alleged that the arbitrators incurred.
• Court of Appeal of Genoa, 4 April 2023, no. 390
  Article 824 of the Code of Civil Procedure grants arbitrators, regardless of their profession, a special certification power.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 4 April 2023, no. 1148
  The internal contradiction between different parts of the grounds determines the nullity of the award only if it prevents the reconstruction of the logical and legal path underlying the decision.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 4 April 2023, no. 1173
  The scope of an arbitration agreement that contains an indication of the disputes to be referred to arbitrators with reference to certain abstract facts, such as, for example, the interpretation and execution of a contract, must be reconstructed, pursuant to Art. 1362 of the Civil Code, on the basis of the common will of the parties to the arbitration agreement, on the basis of the common will of the parties to the dispute, without limiting itself to the literal meaning of the words; therefore, when the clause contains a reference to legal definitions as a summary of the possible subject matter of future disputes, they do not assume the purpose of circumscribing the content of the arbitration agreement, since a restrictive interpretation of the clause would entail the need to submit to two different bodies (arbitrator and ordinary judge) the decision of closely connected issues with an extension of the time required for the proceedings.
• Court of Appeal of Brescia, 5 April 2023, no. 589
  Expenses incurred in connection with arbitration proceedings that have become unsuccessful due to the other party’s breach of the arbitration agreement represent an item of damages, in relation to which a claim for compensation must be brought.
• Court of Appeal of Palermo, 6 April 2023, no. 576
  Article 54 of Law 392/1978, which prohibited the arbitration of disputes, must be deemed to have been repealed by Article 14(4) of Law 431/1998 also with reference to non-housing leases.
• Court of Appeal of Brescia, 11 April 2023, no. 625.
  The provisions limiting the maximum amount of interest represent rules of public policy, the breach of which may therefore lead to the annulment of the award.
• Court of Appeal of Florence, 14 April 2023, no. 766
  In the case of the simultaneous submission of the objection of compromise and counterclaim, the former cannot be considered waived by reason of the formulation of the latter, since the examination of the counterclaim is ontologically conditioned on the non-acceptance of the objection of compromise, the merits of the latter being incompatible with the examination of the counterclaim.
• Court of Appeal of Palermo, 26 April 2023, no. 833
  In order to distinguish between regular and informal arbitration, the arbitration clause must be interpreted with reference to the literal fact, the common intention of the parties and their overall conduct, and the fact that the clause does not refer to the formalities of regular arbitration does not unequivocally suggest that arbitration is informal, since the greater guarantees offered by regular arbitration as regards the enforceability of the award and the system of appeals must be taken into account.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 3 May 2023, no. 1397
  The party that has commenced an arbitration proceedings is not allowed to invoke the nullity of the award arising from the invalidity of the arbitration clause, as this is precluded by the provisions of Article 829(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, pursuant to which the party that has given rise to the ground of nullity or has renounced it may not challenge the award on that ground.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 8 May 2023, no. 1477
  Where an extra-contractual liability may arise with profiles also involving other legal entities not parties to the negotiation agreement containing the arbitration clause, arbitral jurisdiction must necessarily be denied. Where, on the other hand, any unlawful conduct is part of a contractual context, the expansive vis of the waiver of the ordinary court’s jurisdiction is undoubtedly preferable, also in order to avoid a fragmentation, the result only of qualifications made by the parties: qualifications that are, moreover, rooted in the same historical-naturalistic facts, always involving the same parties.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 9 May 2023, no. 1492
  An appeal against an award on grounds of nullity has the character of a limited appeal and does not introduce an appellate judgment aimed at reviewing the merits of the arbitral decision. It allows only the ascertainment of the existence of the nullities peremptorily listed in article 829 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, as a consequence of errors in procedendo or in iudicando, with the consequence that only in the event of a rescindent judgement, concluded with the ascertainment of the nullity of the award, is it possible to review the merits of the arbitral decision that is the subject of the possible subsequent iudicium rescissorium.
• Court of Appeal of Catanzaro, 10 May 2023, no. 582
  The defect of contradiction that allows the award to be pronounced null and void consists in an obvious contradiction between several parts of the operative part or contradiction between the operative part and the grounds, being essentially a defect that is characterised by making the content of the decision unintelligible. On the other hand, the defect in question does not include internal contradictions between the different parts of the grounds, which can be considered a defect of the award only to the extent that they make it absolutely impossible to reconstruct the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of a statement of reasons traceable to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Bari, 11 May 2023, no. 761
  The only purpose of the proceedings challenging an arbitral award is to verify the legitimacy of the decision rendered by the arbitrators, not to review the issues on the merits submitted to them, so that the findings of fact made by the arbitrators, such as those concerning the interpretation of the contract at issue, cannot be censured in the proceedings challenging the award, unless the grounds on this point are completely lacking or absolutely deficient.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 16 May 2023, no. 1579
  On the subject of an appeal against an arbitral award, the defect of reasoning, as a defect falling under Article 829(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, can only be found in the event that the grounds of the award are completely lacking or are so deficient as not to allow the identification of the rationale of the decision adopted or, in other words, to denote an argumentative process that is absolutely unacceptable on a dialectical level, so as to result in a non-motivation.
• Court of Appeal of Cagliari, ord. 16 May 2023
  Unlike the provisions of Article 283(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure with reference to the suspension of the enforceability of judgments at first instance, the application for suspension of the enforceability of an arbitral award, as referred to in Article 830(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, does not necessarily have to be made with the appeal. Moreover, it may be modified or revoked, since Article 351(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure does not apply either.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 16 May 2023, no. 3473
  If the defendant, in the presence of an arbitration clause for informal arbitration, objects to the lack of jurisdiction of the state court seised, the latter correctly pronounces the application inadmissible.
• Court of Appeal Rome, 16 May 2023, no. 3473
  An appeal for nullity of the award in the event that the arbitration agreement is invalid is allowed on condition that the party has objected in the first defence following the acceptance of the arbitrators to the latter’s lack of jurisdiction due to the invalidity of the arbitration agreement or the arbitration clause (except in the case of a non-arbitrable dispute).
  The subject matter of civic uses does not fall within the category of non-disposable rights, and therefore insusceptible of knowledge by the arbitrators pursuant to art. 806 of the code of civil procedure.
• Court of Appeal of Florence, 17 May 2023, no. 1047
  In the case of the bankruptcy of a s.r.l., pursuant to section 146(2)(a) of the bankruptcy law, the liquidator is the only person entitled to pursue the corporate liability action already brought by the shareholder in his capacity as the company’s procedural substitute pursuant to section 2476(3) of the Italian Civil Code, so that if, during the pendency of the arbitration proceedings, the receiver does not manifest his intention to continue the action originally brought, the application must be declared inadmissible due to the shareholder’s lack of standing.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 17 May 2023, no. 1087
  Article 3 of Law 129/2004, which imposes precise disclosure obligations on the franchisor, is not a public policy provision, and therefore its violation by a foreign arbitral tribunal is not capable of preventing the recognition and enforcement of the award.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 19 May 2023, no. 2287
  The arbitrators’ direct settlement of costs and their remuneration has the value of a mere contractual proposal, which becomes binding only if accepted by all the disputants, and may also give rise to partial obligations, where the debtors have accepted, even by facta concludentia, the division of the original obligation into two or more obligations of different amounts, each of which is to be borne by the parties.
• Court of Appeal of Messina, 22 May 2023, no. 439
  Pursuant to the transitional rules laid down by Article 27 of Legislative Decree 40/2006, Article 829(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure as modified by article 24 of legislative decree 40/2006, applies to arbitration proceedings commenced after the entry into force of the aforementioned decree, but the law to which the same article 829(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure refers, in order to establish whether the award may be set aside for violation of the rules of law relating to the merits of the dispute, is the law in force at the time the arbitration agreement is entered into.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 22 May 2023, no. 1646
  Article V of the New York Convention (in accordance with Art. 840 of the Code of Civil Procedure) does not preclude the recognition of an award rendered on the basis of an arbitration clause under German law, contained in general terms and conditions referred to in order confirmations.
• Court of Appeal of Lecce, 23 May 2023, no. 449
  In arbitration proceedings, where the parties have not bound the arbitrators to abide by the rules of the Code of Civil Procedure, the parties are allowed to modify and extend the initial claims, without the provisions of Art. 183 of the Code of Civil Procedure being applicable, provided that the parties are allowed to present their cases.
• Court of Appeal of Brescia, 5 June 2023, no. 948
  On the subject of corporate arbitration, where the parties have authorised the arbitrators to decide ex aequo et bono, an appeal against the arbitral decision for errores in iudicando is not permitted, unless it relates to non-arbitrable issues or the validity of shareholders’ meeting resolutions.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 6 June 2023, no. 4062
  Irritual arbitration, as an instrument of dispute resolution hinging on entrusting to third parties the task of seeking an amicable settlement traceable to the will of the parties, is of a negotiated nature and, therefore, the relative award can be challenged only for flaws in the negotiated will (error, fraud or violence) or for incapacity of the parties or of the arbitrators.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 6 June 2023, no. 1231
  The decision on the merits of the case in the absence of an interest to act constitutes a flaw in the award pursuant to Art. 829, para. 1, no. 4 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, which sanctions with nullity the decision on the merits of the dispute in any case in which the merits could not be decided.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 6 June 2023, no. 1238
  The sanction of nullity provided by Art. 829, para. 1, no. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions does not correspond to that of Art. 360, para. 1, no. 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (formerly Article 360(1)(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure), but must be understood in the sense that such inconsistency must arise between the different parts of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, while internal inconsistency between the different parts of the grounds, not expressly provided for among the defects entailing the nullity of the award, may be relevant as a defect of the award only to the extent that it determines the absolute impossibility of reconstructing the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of a grounds traceable to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Florence, 7 June 2023, no. 1210
  The favour for arbitral jurisdiction contained in Article 808-quater of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure refers only to cases where the doubt of interpretation concerns the quantification of the subject matter devolved to the arbitrators by the relevant agreement and not the parties’ choice of arbitration itself.
• Court of Appeal of Messina, 9 June 2023, no. 506
  Arbitrators, in exercising their power of qualification and interpretation of the claim, are not conditioned by the expressions used by the party but must ascertain and assess the substantive content of the claim, as deducible not only from the literal content of the acts but also from the nature of the events deduced and represented by the same party and from the clarifications provided by it in the course of the proceedings, as well as from the concrete measure requested, with the sole limits of the correspondence between the request made and the pronouncement and the prohibition of substituting ex officio an action different from the one proposed.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 12 June 2023, no. 2688
  On the subject of arbitral awards, the statement that the decision was adopted in the personal conference of all arbitrators and that, in the event of the dissenting arbitrator’s failure to sign it, the latter did not wish to sign it, even though it constitutes – pursuant to the combined provisions of articles 823, para. 1, para. 2 no. 6 and para. 3, and 829, para. 1 no. 5, of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure – a requirement of validity, does not require any particular formulation, since it is sufficient that the text of the decision shows, even implicitly, that the arbitrator did not wish to sign it. – a prerequisite for the validity of the ruling, does not require any particular formulation, it being sufficient that the text of the decision shows, even implicitly, that the manner of deliberation was observed.
• Court of Appeal of Genoa, 13 June 2023, no. 695
  Section 832(6) of the Code of Civil Procedure, pursuant to which, if the arbitral institution refuses to administer the arbitration, the agreement maintains its effectiveness by applying the chapters governing the arbitration (thus replacing the arbitrators). This is all the more so in the event that the arbitral institution cannot (note, not only does not wish to) administer the arbitration.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 13 June 2023, no. 1289
  The orientation according to which the production in court of a private writing by the party that did not sign it constitutes an equivalent of the failure to sign it at the same time is, however, clear in excluding the operativeness of this mechanism for perfecting the contract where the party that had consented to the negotiation agreement by signing has revoked said consent. Withdrawal of consent may operate for the entire negotiation agreement or for the individual arbitration clause, which is not an ancillary agreement to the contract in which it is inserted but has its own individuality and autonomy, clearly distinct from that of the contract to which it accedes.
• Court of Appeal of Genoa, 14 June 2023, no. 702
  The arbitration clause contained in a company’s by-laws, which provides for the devolution to arbitration of disputes relating to the company’s contract, must be deemed to extend to the dispute concerning a shareholder’s withdrawal from the company.
• Court of Appeal of Salerno, 14 June 2023, no. 795
  In the event of uncertainty as to the interpretation of the arbitration clause’s wording, preference must be given to the assessment of arbitration as ritual rather than as informal, as this qualification tends to better guarantee the parties in relation to the decision taken.
• Court of Appeal of Lecce (Taranto section), 16 June 2023, no. 246
  The objection of inadmissibility of the claim, insofar as the dispute is referred to arbitrators, is an objection in the strict sense of the term, which must be raised with the notice of appearance and response promptly filed.
• Court of Appeal of Catania, 19 June 2023, no. 1137
  The sanction of nullity provided by Article 829, para. 1, no. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions does not correspond to that of Article 360, para. 1, no. 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (It must be understood in the sense that such inconsistency must arise between the different parts of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, whereas internal inconsistency between the different parts of the grounds, which is not expressly provided for among the defects entailing the nullity of the award, may be considered as a defect of the award only to the extent that it makes it absolutely impossible to reconstruct the logical and legal background of the decision due to the total absence of a statement of reasons that can be traced back to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Catania, 20 June 2023, no. 1156
  The sanction of nullity provided by Article 829, para. 1, no. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions does not correspond to that of Article 360, para. 1, no. 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (It must be understood in the sense that such inconsistency must arise between the different parts of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, whereas internal inconsistency between the different parts of the grounds, which is not expressly provided for among the defects entailing the nullity of the award, may be considered as a defect of the award only to the extent that it makes it absolutely impossible to reconstruct the logical and legal background of the decision due to the total absence of a statement of reasons that can be traced back to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 20 June 2023, no. 2043
  An appeal against an award pursuant to Article 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure is allowed only to assert errores in iudicando and errores in procedendo within the boundaries dictated by the aforementioned rule. Since it has the character of a judgment with limited criticism, an appeal on the grounds of nullity of the award cannot admit a review on the merits, by the appellate court, of the arbitrators’ decision, allowing only the so-called iudicium rescindens, with the ascertainment of the existence, or non-existence, of any of the grounds for nullity exhaustively provided for by the provision.
• Court of Appeal of Catania, 21 July 2023, no. 1413
  In arbitration proceedings, where the parties have not determined the procedural rules to be adopted in the compromise or arbitration clause, the arbitrators are free to regulate the structure of the proceedings as they see fit and, therefore, also to deviate from the prescriptions dictated by the Code of Civil Procedure as long as they respect the mandatory principle of cross-examination laid down by Article 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which, however, appropriately adapted to the proceedings before the arbitrators, must be understood in the sense that the parties must be offered, in order to allow them adequate defensive activity throughout the proceedings, the possibility of examining and analysing the evidence and findings of the trial even after the preliminary investigation has been completed and up to the time of the closure of the hearing; with the consequence that the arbitrators may regulate the taking of evidence in the manner they deem most appropriate, except for the obligation, after the completion of the preliminary investigation and before issuing the ruling, to make the parties aware of the results of the same preliminary investigation and to assign them a time limit for submitting their respective observations and defences, including the filing of a report, entrusted to trusted experts, containing observations and remarks on the findings of the court-appointed expert’s report; It follows that, where the court-appointed expert witness acquires documentation by depositing it together with the report at the end of the investigations without having shown it to a party’s expert witness, the latter, if it has failed to ask the arbitrators to grant a time limit for observations and remarks on the expert witness’s report, cannot complain of any breach of the principle of cross-examination.
• Court of Appeal of Catanzaro, 21 June 2023, no. 749
  It is incumbent on the party that intends to challenge an award for breach of the rules of law applicable to the merits of the dispute, alleging that the arbitration agreement predates the 2006 reform, to prove this circumstance.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 21 June 2023, no. 2889
  The arbitration clause that refers generically to disputes arising from the contract to which it relates must be interpreted, in the absence of express will to the contrary, as meaning that all and only disputes having causa petendi in the contract itself fall within the jurisdiction of arbitration, with the exclusion of those that have, in it, only a historical premise.
• Court of Appeal of Genoa, 22 June 2023, no. 751
  Pursuant to Article 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure, the jurisdiction of arbitrators is not excluded by the fact that the same case is pending before the court, nor by the connection between the dispute referred to them and a case pending before the court.
• Court of Appeal of Lecce, 22 June 2023, no. 545
  In the event of a successful opposition to an injunction, the arbitrators having jurisdiction, the opposing party must be ordered to bear the costs of the proceedings, since this case does not fall under any of those governed by Article 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows for the offsetting of costs.
• Court of Appeal of Catania, 29 June 2023, no. 1226
  Since in informal arbitration the parties intend to entrust the arbitrator with the solution of a dispute through a strictly negotiated instrument – by means of an amicable settlement or a transaction of ascertainment ascribable to their will – undertaking to consider the arbitrators’ decision as the expression of such personal will, an appeal for nullity of an award is not admissible, even though the decision has been filed and made enforceable pursuant to art. 825 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, while only an action for (any) defects of the agreement is legitimately admissible, to be brought in accordance with the ordinary rules on jurisdiction and the dual level of jurisdiction.
• Court of Appeal of Messina, 29 June 2023, no. 577
  An appeal against an award with regard to the grounds is allowed only in the presence of a deficiency such as to constitute its substantial non-existence, i.e. when there is an absolute impossibility of reconstructing the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of a statement of reasons traceable to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 29 June 2023, no. 3086
  Liability actions brought against directors and statutory auditors of companies do not give rise to a hypothesis of necessary joinder.  Therefore, where only some of the directors or statutory auditors, who are defendants before the state court, have justifiably raised an objection of compromise, only the claims against the latter must be submitted to arbitration.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 10 July 2023, No. 4958
  The interpretation given by the arbitrators to the contract and the reasons for it may be reviewed, in proceedings challenging an award on grounds of nullity, only for breach of the rules of law, so that the appellate court is not permitted to review the logic of the reasons (where they exist and are not so inadequate as not to allow reconstruction of the logic followed by the arbitrators in reaching a certain conclusion), nor the assessment of the evidence made by the arbitrators in ascertaining the common will of the parties.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 12 July 2023, no. 3357
  Where an arbitration clause in the articles of association is amended to make it compatible with the provisions of Legislative Decree No. 5/2003, the law on the basis of which to determine whether an appeal against the award for breach of the rules of law applicable to the merits of the dispute is admissible is that in force at the time the arbitration agreement was originally entered into.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 14 July 2023, No. 2305
  Pursuant to Articles 807 and 808 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the waiver of ordinary jurisdiction in favour of arbitral jurisdiction must be agreed in writing. Therefore, if a contract is concluded by conclusive conduct, on the basis of a written proposal, it is valid and effective to regulate the contract, but this is not sufficient to assign validity to a specific agreement for which the written form ad substantiam is required.
• Court of Appeal of Brescia, 18 July 2023, no. 1205
  The sanction of nullity provided by Article 829, para. 1, no. 11, of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions does not correspond to that of Article 360, para. 1, no. 5, of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure. (It must be understood in the sense that such inconsistency must arise between the different parts of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, whereas internal inconsistency between the different parts of the grounds, which is not expressly provided for among the defects entailing the nullity of the award, may be considered as a defect of the award only to the extent that it makes it absolutely impossible to reconstruct the logical and legal background of the decision due to the total absence of a statement of reasons that can be traced back to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 19 July 2023, no. 5232
  The sanction of nullity provided by Article 829, para. 1, no. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions does not correspond to that of Article 360, para. 1, no. 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (It must be understood in the sense that such inconsistency must arise between the different parts of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, whereas internal inconsistency between the different parts of the grounds, which is not expressly provided for among the defects that lead to the nullity of the award, may be considered as a defect of the award only to the extent that it makes it absolutely impossible to reconstruct the logical and legal background of the decision due to the total absence of a statement of reasons that can be traced back to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 20 July 2023, no. 3481
  The provision of Art. 808-quater of the Code of Civil Procedure only concerns cases where the content of the clause is doubtful.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 20 July 2023, no. 5271
  Pursuant to Art. 824-bis of the Code of Civil Procedure, the effects of a ritual award, from the date of its last signature, are equivalent to those of a judgment. In view of its ability to acquire the requirement of immutability, i.e. to formally become res judicata, once an appeal for nullity has been rejected or precluded due to expiry of the time limit, it follows that it is impossible to submit the same dispute to a new state or arbitration court judgement, since the activity of the arbitrators is of a jurisdictional nature and replaces the function of the ordinary judge.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 21 July 2023, no. 2409
  An award signed by all arbitrators is not null and void pursuant to article 829 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure if the arbitrators fail to sign all the sheets making up the document, since by signing the last sheet, the arbitrators assume the authorship of the act in its entirety.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 21 July 2023, no. 5292
  An application for a negative assessment of the (non-)recognisability of the award is not admissible, as the special proceedings provided for in arts. 839 and 840 of the Code of Civil Procedure are the only forum in which the effectiveness of the award can be discussed in the domestic legal system.
• Court of Appeal of Catania, 26 July 2023, no. 1442
  The decision of the first judge, declining jurisdiction in favour of the arbitrators, can only be the subject of a regulation of jurisdiction and not of an appeal.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 27 July 2023, no. 1669
  The dispute concerning a loan granted by the company to some of its shareholders is not referred to arbitration jurisdiction even in the presence of a statutory arbitration clause.
• Court of Appeal of Genoa, 28 July 2023, no. 933
  An arbitration clause for foreign arbitration is validly stipulated even in the absence of specific written approval, pursuant to Art. 1341 of the Italian Civil Code, even though the contract was concluded in Italy, because the arbitration clause contained in a contract between an Italian citizen and a foreigner constitutes an unequivocal manifestation of willingness to refer disputes arising from the contract to foreign arbitration and the applicable international convention constitutes a special law that derogates from the general principles laid down in Articles 1341 and 1342 of the Italian Civil Code, which are not mandatory.
• Court of Appeal of Florence, 1 August 2023, no. 1665
  Questions concerning jurisdiction and competence must be resolved on the basis of the content of the claim brought before the court. Therefore, in the presence of a statutory arbitration clause, disputes brought against the alleged de facto partner are also devolved to the jurisdiction of the arbitrators.
• Court of Appeal of Bari, 23 August 2023, no. 1220
  An appeal against an award based on questions relating to the ritual or irritual nature of arbitration is inadmissible when such questions are raised for the first time in the appeal, having never been previously raised in the arbitration proceedings pursuant to section 817 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure.
• Court of Appeal of Genoa, 28 August 2023, no. 956
  The sanction of nullity provided by Art. 829, para. 1, no. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions does not correspond to that of Art. 360, para. 1, no. 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (It must be understood in the sense that such inconsistency must arise between the different parts of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, whereas internal inconsistency between the different parts of the grounds, which is not expressly provided for among the defects that lead to the nullity of the award, may be considered as a defect of the award only if it makes it absolutely impossible to reconstruct the logical and legal background of the decision due to the total absence of a statement of reasons that can be traced back to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 5 September 2023, no. 2596
  Once the arbitrators have established, through the interpretation of the clause, the objective scope of the clause and, therefore, of their decisional power, the relative dictum, precisely because it has previously defined the boundaries of the clause itself, cannot be challenged for nullity pursuant to Article 829, para. 1, no. 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Court of Appeal of Salerno, 5 September 2023, no. 1089
  The objection of lack of jurisdiction of the arbitrator referred to in Art. 817, para. 2 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, except in the case of a non-arbitrable dispute, consistently with the new quasi-jurisdictional meaning of ritual arbitration, is to be considered as an objection of rite in the strict sense, subject to the time limit indicated by Art. 817, para. 3 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, only for the party that took part in the relevant arbitration proceedings and not for the party that, having remained absent, challenges in the appeal against the award that the dispute is devolved to the arbitrators.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 7 September 2023, no. 5633
  Arbitrators are called upon without formality to regulate the preliminary investigation choices (unless expressly provided in the agreement for a formal obligation to comply with the rules of the code of civil procedure) in the manner they deem most appropriate, with the only obligation being to place the parties not only in a position to know and participate in them, but also to contest their outcome, and these modalities appear to have been respected in the case under examination.
• Court of Appeal of Cagliari (Sassari section), 8 September 2023, no. 300
  The procedure for the correction of the arbitral award, in the hypothesis that it is carried out by the arbitrator (art. 826, par. 2, code of civil procedure), does not contemplate an activity of annotation on the award but only a communication to the parties pursuant to art. 824 of the code of civil procedure.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 8 September 2023, no. 5668
  For the purposes of the commencement of the short time limit for challenging the award, the notification of the arbitral decision, provided for by Article 828 of the Code of Civil Procedure, may be made by delivery to the party personally or, alternatively, to the defence counsel appointed by the latter pursuant to Article 816-bis, para. 1, last part, of the Code of Civil Procedure, without any relevance as to whether or not the party has elected domicile with that professional.
• Court of Appeal of Palermo, 11 September 2023, no. 1554
  When challenging an arbitration award on grounds of nullity, pursuant to articles 828 et seq. of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, the Court of Appeal cannot ex officio find grounds not raised in the appeal – except for the nullity of the arbitration agreement and the arbitration clause – since this is an appeal that is strictly limited and bound, in its devolving effect, to the court hearing it, both in the abstract, by the typical nature of the defects that may be raised, and in concrete terms, by those expressly and specifically raised.
• Court of Appeal of Bari, 20 September 2023, no. 1338
  Motivational justification is the exclusive domain of the arbitrator, with the sole exception of the case in which it must be judged merely apparent; an appearance that occurs when it, although graphically existing, does not, however, make the basis of the decision perceptible because it contains arguments objectively incapable of making known the reasoning followed by the judge in forming his own conviction, not being able to leave the interpreter the task of supplementing it with the most varied, hypothetical conjectures.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 25 September 2023, no. 2736
  The sanction of nullity provided for in Article 829, para. 1, no. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions is to be understood in the sense that such contradiction must emerge between the different components of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, while internal contradictions between the different parts of the grounds, not expressly provided for among the defects entailing the nullity of the award, may assume relevance as a defect of the award only insofar as they determine the absolute impossibility of reconstructing the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of a statement of reasons traceable to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Messina, 2 October 2023, no. 827
  If the parties dispute the devolution of the dispute to the national judge rather than to an Italian arbitrator, the judgement deciding on such dispute in the sense of arbitral competence must be challenged pursuant to Art. 819-ter of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure and, therefore, by means of the regulation of competence.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 3 October 2023, no. 1920
  The arbitration clause that provides for the possibility of referring disputes between shareholders as well as disputes between the company and the shareholders to arbitrators, without any further additions, cannot also include the liability action pursuant to Art. 2476 of the Italian Civil Code brought by the shareholder against the director, even though a shareholder of the company, since it is not expressly provided for.
• Court of Appeal of Bari, 6 October 2023, no. 1460 
  Defective motivation, as a defect falling under Article 829 no. 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in relation to Article 823 no. 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, can only be found in the event that the grounds of the award are completely lacking or are so deficient as not to allow the identification of the rationale of the decision adopted or, in other words, to denote an argumentative process that is absolutely unacceptable on a dialectical level, so as to result in a non-motivation.
• Court of Appeal of Palermo, 6 October 2023, no. 1710
  In the case of an appeal for nullity of an arbitral award, which is a judgment of binding criticism that can be brought within the limits provided for by the law, the rule of specificity in the wording of the grounds is applicable, in view of the rescinding nature of such a judgment and the fact that only compliance with this rule can allow the judge and the other party to verify whether the objections formulated correspond exactly to the cases of appealability provided for.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 10 October 2023, no. 1984
  The sanction of nullity provided for by Article 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions is to be understood in the sense that such contradiction must emerge between the different components of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, while internal contradictions between the different parts of the grounds, not expressly provided for among the defects entailing the nullity of the award, may be relevant as a defect of the award only insofar as they determine the absolute impossibility of reconstructing the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of a grounds traceable to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 10 October 2023, no. 1984
  The sanction of nullity provided for by Article 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions is to be understood in the sense that such contradiction must emerge between the different components of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, while internal contradictions between the different parts of the grounds, not expressly provided for among the defects entailing the nullity of the award, may be relevant as a defect of the award only insofar as they determine the absolute impossibility of reconstructing the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of a grounds traceable to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal Milan, 12 October 2023, no. 2896
  The nullity of the award for failure to rule on the parties’ requests and objections, in accordance with the arbitration agreement, pursuant to Art. 829, para. 1, no. 12, of the Code of Civil Procedure is possible only in the event of failure by the arbitrators to examine questions of the merits, and not also questions of procedure, in which case an appeal for nullity may be brought only, under other paragraphs of the same article 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to claim the absence of the conditions for the arbitrators to rule on the merits.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 13 October 2023, no. 2019
  The sanction of nullity provided by Article 829, para. 1, no. 4, of the Code of Civil Procedure for the award containing contradictory provisions is to be understood in the sense that such contradiction must emerge between the different components of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, while the internal contradiction between the different parts of the grounds, not expressly provided for among the defects entailing the nullity of the award, may assume relevance, as a defect of the award, only insofar as it determines the absolute impossibility of reconstructing the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of a grounds referable to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Brescia, 16 October 2023, no. 1555
  In the field of corporate arbitration, with reference to awards issued on issues concerning the validity of shareholders’ meeting resolutions, an appeal on the grounds of errores in judicando is allowed, i.e., to use the expression adopted by the legislator, an appeal against the award for breach of the rules of law relating to the merits of the dispute.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 17 October 2023, no. 2955
  Where an arbitration clause in the articles of association provides for the devolution to arbitration also of disputes concerning directors, liquidators or statutory auditors, they are bound by it, without the need for specific approval.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 17 October 2023, no. 4392
  The sanction of nullity provided for in Article 829(1)(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure for an award containing contradictory provisions is to be understood in the sense that such contradiction must arise between the different components of the operative part, i.e. between the grounds and the operative part, while internal contradictions between the different parts of the grounds, not expressly provided for among the defects entailing the nullity of the award, may assume relevance as a defect of the award only insofar as they determine the absolute impossibility of reconstructing the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of a grounds traceable to its functional model.
• Court of Appeal of Florence, 19 October 2023, no. 2124 
  Article 6 of Legislative Decree No. 179/2007 configures a hypothesis of nullity of the arbitration clause, and it is therefore irrelevant that the provision from which it derives was subsequently repealed, since the invalidating effect that affected it occurred at the very moment in which the clause was agreed upon.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 24 October 2023, no. 4501
  An arbitration clause contained in a contract that makes express and specific reference only to certain disputes is applicable only with reference to those disputes.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 26 October 2023, no. 4556
  An appeal against a ritual arbitration award cannot be judged inadmissible merely because its author has mistakenly called it an appeal and has therewith mistakenly requested the reform, rather than the annulment or declaration of nullity, of the appealed award.
• Court of Appeal of Bologna, 2 November 2023, no. 2333
  In arbitration proceedings, the failure to observe the principle of cross-examination (enshrined in Article 816-bis of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure) is not a formal defect. ) is not a formal defect, but one of activity, so that, in order to proceed to the declaratory judgement of nullity, it is necessary to ascertain the concrete impairment of the right of defence that would have been suffered by the opposing party, taking into account the manner in which the parties were confronted (having regard to their respective claims) and the possibility, for them, to exercise, in compliance with the rule audiatur et altera pars, on an equal footing, the procedural faculties attributed to them.
• Court of Appeal Milan, 6 November 2023, no. 3107
  Since the rules set forth in art. 645 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure are applicable to proceedings for recognition of a foreign award, the documents required to obtain a declaration of the effectiveness of the foreign arbitration award may also be produced in the opposition proceedings.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 6 November 2023, no. 4694
  In relation to disputes concerning concession-contractual relationships, the ordinary Judge has jurisdiction if only fees, considerations or indemnities are at issue and not also when a question arises on the events of the relationship itself, or on the consequences of such events not pertaining to said considerations or indemnities (as in the case of claims for damages), the administrative Judge having exclusive jurisdiction in the latter cases. Hence the validity of the arbitration clause contained in a concession-contract, for the devolution to arbitration of the disputes between the assignee and the assigning body, to the extent that it concerns the first of the aforementioned disputes.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 6 November 2023, n. 7105
  Finally, the fact that an arbitration clause allows access to arbitration proceedings at the initiative of only one party does not render it illegitimate, as it is not contrary to any provision of law and may even be justified by the protection of the interest of the party deemed weak.
• Court of Appeal of Venice, 6 November 2023, no. 2150
  Full validity and effectiveness must also be attributed to the award digitally signed, with qualified signature, by the arbitrators, since such award is unalterable and unequivocally traceable to the arbitrators who signed it. Indeed, there is no obstacle to an award that, like judgments, is drafted exclusively in the form of a computerised document and is communicated to the parties by telematic means.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 7 November 2023, no. 7157
  On the subject of appealing against an arbitral award, the provision in Article 829(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure is – nullity of an award containing contradictory provisions – must be understood as meaning that the contradiction must arise between the different components of the operative part, and not also between different parts of the grounds compared with each other, or between the grounds themselves and the operative part. Internal contradictions in the grounds, which are not nominatim among the defects that lead to the nullity of the award, can therefore be relevant only in the event of absolute impossibility of reconstructing the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of any form of reasoning that can be traced back to its functional legal model.
• Court of Appeal of Palermo, 7 November 2023, no. 1867
  Pursuant to Article 820(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the time limit for the decision may be further extended for each of the cases under a), b), c) and d), provided that no more than once within each of them.
• Court of Appeal of Bari, 9 November 2023, no. 1664
  An appeal against the award in the parts corrected following the granting of a petition for correction of material errors is possible only in the peremptory hypotheses of nullity set out in detail in Article 829 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Court of Appeal of Bologna, 9 November 2023, no. 2235
  Failure to state reasons pursuant to Articles 829(5) and 823(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure is only to be found in cases where the reasoning is completely lacking or so deficient as to make it impossible to understand the reasoning followed by the arbitrators and to identify the rationale of the decision adopted.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 9 November 2023, no. 4773
  The arbitration clause contained in a company’s bylaws referring to all disputes between the company and the individual shareholders or between the shareholders must be interpreted as meaning that only disputes having causa petendi in the company’s contract fall within the scope of arbitration, which do not include those concerning a shareholders’ loan.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 11 November 2023, no. 7277
  The irritual arbitral award – like the contractual expert’s report – due to its quoad effectum, negotiating nature, being intended to integrate a manifestation of negotiated will with a function that replaces that of the parties in conflict, and binding on them, is only appealable for the flaws that can undermine any manifestation of negotiated will. Therefore, in order to be relevant, according to the provision of article 1428 of the Italian Civil Code, the error in the arbitral award must be substantial – or essential – and recognisable – articles 1429 and 1431 of the Italian Civil Code. – i.e., according to established case law, the arbitrators must have misrepresented or altered their perception of the facts by considering facts that certainly do not exist and vice versa, or contested facts that are not such – similarly to the revocatory error contemplated, for judicial orders, by Article 395 no. 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure. – whereas the arbitrators’ error that concerns the determination they made on the basis of the conviction they reached after interpreting and examining the elements acquired, including the evaluation criteria indicated by the parties, is not relevant, because they, in giving content to the will of the parties, perform an interpretative and not perceptive activity, which is transfused into the judgement entrusted to them and which, by their own will, is unobjectionable, even though it is a transaction stipulated through their respective arbitrators-mandates.
• Court of Appeal of Palermo, 14 November 2023, no. 1904
  The Public Administration is precluded from availing itself, in the resolution of disputes arising from contracts concluded with private parties, of the so-called irritual arbitration instrument.
• Court of Appeal of Ancona, 15 November 2023, no. 1656
  In informal arbitration, the award may be challenged for essential error only when the arbitrators’ will has been diverted by an altered perception or a false representation of the reality and the factual elements submitted to their examination (so-called error of fact), and not also when the deviation pertains to the assessment of a reality whose elements have been exactly perceived (so-called error of judgement).
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 15 November 2023, no. 3246
  If the objection of compromise is upheld, the party that has brought the case before the state court is entirely unsuccessful and none of the reasons that, pursuant to Article 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, may justify the offsetting of costs, nor any other similar reasons, apply.
• Court of Appeal of Rome, 16 November 2023, no. 7374
  In arbitration proceedings, the principle of cross-examination shall be deemed to have been observed when the parties have had the opportunity to present their respective assumptions, to be informed of the evidence and the results of the proceedings and have been granted the time limit to submit pleadings and replies and to be informed in good time of the opposing claims and requests.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 21 November 2023, no. 3277
  Ordinary arbitrators, authorised to rule in equity pursuant to article 822 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, may well rule in accordance with the law when they consider that law and equity coincide, without it being necessary for them to affirm and explain such coincidence, which may be inferred even implicitly from the overall reasoning in support of the decision, the existence of a defect attributable to the violation of the limits of the agreement being possible only when the arbitrators deny a priori the possibility of availing themselves of the equitable powers granted to them.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 21 November 2023, no. 3285
  Only the proof of individual negotiation is exculpatory with respect to the inclusion of the arbitration clause and such proof is incumbent on the professional who intends to avail himself of such clause.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 23 November 2023, no. 3350
  There is no ontological incompatibility between bankruptcy (and insolvency proceedings in general) and arbitration.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 4 December 2023, n. 3440
  The arbitration clause relating only to disputes on the interpretation of a contract clearly does not include in its scope of application all disputes having causa petendi in the contract itself, i.e., in the present case, claims for the performance of contractual services, since they relate, rather, to the executive phase of the contract, i.e., to the ascertainment of the parties’ non-compliance with their obligations.
• Court of Appeal of Milan, 4 December 2023, no. 3456
  On the subject of arbitration proceedings, the question of the breach of cross-examination must be examined not from a formal point of view, but in the context of an investigation aimed at ascertaining an actual impairment of the opportunity to deduce and contradict, in order to verify whether the act has also achieved the purpose of establishing a regular cross-examination and whether, in any event, the breach has not caused prejudice to the party; It follows that the nullity of the award and of the proceedings must be declared only if in the appeal, the complaint of the defect capable of causing them is followed by an indication of the specific prejudice that it caused to the right of defence.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 11 December 2023, no. 5237
  Even in the case of translatio iudici, the principle applies that when, following a judgment declaring the lack of jurisdiction of the court seised, a procedural activity has been carried out that may in abstract terms be referred to the model of the resumption, it is up to the court before which the resumption was carried out to establish whether it is timely and, more generally, meets the requirements of form and content necessary for the effect of the continuation of the proceedings before the court ad quem to occur and for the extinction to be avoided. To this end, it is necessary to make a careful examination of the substantive content of the writ of resumption in order to verify the existence of an unequivocal intention to continue the proceedings initially brought, an intention that can also be implicitly configured, without the need for an express declaration to this effect.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 13 December 2023, no. 5258
  On the subject of general terms and conditions of contract, since the specific approval in writing constitutes, pursuant to Art. 1341 co. 2 of the Civil Code, a requirement for the opposability of the so-called vexatious clauses (including the arbitration clause) to the contracting party, only the latter is legitimated to assert any lack thereof and not also the predisposing party who, therefore, cannot invoke its nullity for the lack of said specific approval.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 15 December 2023, no. 5306
  The arbitration clause is an autonomous transaction with procedural effects that, in the absence of an express provision to the contrary intended by the parties, is subject to the general principle of tempus regit actum.
• Court of Appeal of Bologna, 17 December 2023, no. 2562
  On the subject of appealing against an arbitral award, the provision in Article 829(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure is – nullity of an award containing contradictory provisions – must be understood as meaning that the contradiction must arise between the different components of the operative part, and not also between different parts of the grounds compared with each other, or between the grounds themselves and the operative part. Internal inconsistency in the grounds, which is not nominated as a defect giving rise to the nullity of the award, can therefore be relevant only in the event of absolute impossibility of reconstructing the logical and legal process underlying the decision due to the total absence of any form of reasoning that can be traced back to its functional legal model.
• Court of Appeal of Naples, 29 December 2023, no. 5530
  The award of fees made by the arbitrators in the award has, according to agreed doctrine and jurisprudence, the value of a mere proposal, which the parties may accept or not accept; only in the event of acceptance by all the parties does it become binding; otherwise, i.e. in the event of non-acceptance even by a single party, the proposal will have no effect, not even vis-à-vis the party that accepted it.

Courts of first instance

• Court of Brescia, 4 January 2023, no. 10
  The possibility for a party to express an opinion affecting the contractual regulation excludes the application of Article 1341 of the Italian Civil Code and therefore the necessary approval in writing of the arbitration clause.
• Court of Florence, ord. 4 January 2023
  Pending the establishment of the Arbitration Court, it is possible to apply to the Court pursuant to Article 669-quinquies of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure in order to obtain the necessary precautionary measures.
• Court of Venice, ord. 4 January 2023
  The arbitrator’s right to receive payment of the fee arises from the fact that he has actually performed the task, without, in the summary liquidation procedure provided for by Article 814 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the right to receive payment of the fee, Once the award has been pronounced, the President of the Court is not allowed to investigate the validity of the compromise and the award and the regularity of the appointment of the arbitrators, matters included in the provision of article 829 of the code of civil procedure and reserved to the jurisdiction of the appellate court indicated in article 828 of the code of civil procedure.
  If the dispute is referred to an arbitral tribunal, the value of the dispute, which is relevant for the purposes of calculating the arbitrators’ fees, is determined a priori on the basis of the petitum, without any effect being given to a ruling by that tribunal, even if only of inadmissibility or impropriety of the application, given that a hypothetical criterion of ex post determination of the value of the case on the basis of the concrete decisum would be contrary to the rules laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure.
  The payment of the remuneration to the secretary of the arbitral tribunal, understood as a liability related to the performance of the arbitrators’ activities and, as such, a burden on the parties, falls within the jurisdiction of the judge who provides for the payment of the arbitrators’ fees and expenses pursuant to article 814 of the code of civil procedure.
• Court of Bologna, 9 January 2023, no. 10
  The social or collective or super-individual nature of the interest underlying the action does not per se exclude the arbitrability of the dispute arising in the corporate sphere since the interest is only unavailable if its protection is ensured by mandatory rules, as, for example, in the case of rules aimed at ensuring the clarity and accuracy of financial statements.
• Court of Catanzaro, 10 January 2023, no. 24
  The arbitration clause must in any event be specifically approved in writing in view of its vexatious nature [per incuriam].
• Court of Cosenza, 10 January 2023, no. 33
  On the subject of informal arbitration, when the parties have assigned to the arbitrators the power to adopt decisions according to law, the award thus pronounced, given its informality, is appealable only on the grounds of incapacity and defects of will of the arbitrators, excluding errors of judgement and appreciation.
• Court of Milan, 10 January 2023, no. 135
  The rules aimed at ensuring the clarity and accuracy of the financial statements are mandatory as their violation determines a reaction of the system regardless of the conduct of the parties and renders the approval resolution unlawful and, therefore, null and void. These rules, in fact, are not only mandatory, but contain principles dictated to protect not only the interest of the individual shareholders in being informed of the company’s management performance at the end of each financial year, but also the trust of all persons who enter into a relationship with the company, who are entitled to know the company’s actual equity and financial situation. It follows that the dispute concerning the validity of the resolution to challenge the financial statements is not arbitrable.
• Court of Naples, 12 January 2023, no. 347
  The compromise clause in arbitration does not prevent the issuance of an injunction, because the resulting lack of jurisdiction relates to the cognizance of a dispute (and, therefore, presupposes the cross-examination, which is absent in the monitoring proceedings) and because the exception of compromise is optional and cannot be detected ex officio.
• Court of Pisa, 12 January 2023, no. 62
  The dispute concerning the right of the withdrawn shareholders to obtain the liquidation share is devolved, where the company’s bylaws contain an arbitration clause, to the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court.
• Court of Florence, 16 January 2023, no. 97
  In the event of doubt as to the actual will of the contracting parties, one must opt for the arbitration to be non-arbitration, considering that ritual arbitration, by introducing an exception to the jurisdiction of the state court, is exceptional in nature [per incuriam].
• Court of Pavia, 17 January 2023, no. 58
  In the event of an objection to an arbitration agreement raised by the defendant pursuant to Article 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure to which the plaintiff adheres, the rules on procedural agreement provided for in Article 38(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be applied since this provision refers to the derogating territorial jurisdiction. Therefore, as to the costs of the proceedings, the court, taking into account the conduct of the plaintiff, orders him to reimburse them in favour of the defendant.
• Court of Bologna, 18 January 2023, no. 52
  The interpretative favour towards ritual arbitration can only be disclaimed in the face of unequivocal expressions of the contracting parties in the sense of the devolution of the settlement of the dispute to a negotiation instrument, by means of an amicable settlement or a settlement agreement traceable to the will of the parties themselves, who undertake to consider the arbitrators’ decision as an expression of their will.
• Court of Catanzaro, 18 January 2023, no. 99
  Matters relating to directors’ remuneration may also be submitted to arbitration if the articles of association provide for an arbitration clause to settle disputes between directors and the company.
• Court of Benevento, 20 January 2023, no. 195
  The principle of the prevalence of the ordinary judge’s jurisdiction over the arbitral one, affirmed in the past by the Court of Cassation, must now be considered superseded.
• Court of Naples North, 23 January 2023, no. 686
  The rule set forth in Article 1341 of the Italian Civil Code, which requires the specific written approval of the arbitration clause, does not apply outside adhesion contracts.
• Court of Pavia, ord. 24 January 2023
  When a final award has not been pronounced, the request for payment of the arbitrators’ fees gives rise to an ordinary dispute on the right to receive payment of the fees for the fact of having actually performed the task conferred, within the scope of the mandate relationship between the parties, according to the forms of the ordinary procedure.
• Court of L’Aquila, 25 January 2023, no. 61
  In the event of an objection to an arbitration agreement raised by the defendant pursuant to Article 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure to which the plaintiff adheres, the rules on procedural agreement provided for by Article 38, para. 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be applied, given that such provision refers to the derogable territorial jurisdiction. Therefore, as far as the costs of the proceedings are concerned, the court, taking into account the conduct of the plaintiff, orders the plaintiff to reimburse them in favour of the defendant.
• Court of Catanzaro, 27 January 2023, no. 166
  Disputes relating to shareholders’ meeting resolutions having an unlawful or impossible purpose – which give rise to nullity that can also be raised ex officio – and those passed in the absolute absence of information (Article 2479-ter of the Italian Civil Code) belong to non-transferable rights, and therefore cannot be referred to arbitrators. ): the latter cannot include the failure to convene a shareholder, which may, in theory, vitiate the resolution, but which, according to the definition given, does not constitute an inalienable right, the area of which must be considered circumscribed to those interests protected by mandatory rules, the violation of which determines a reaction of the system that is not subject to any party initiative.
• Court of L’Aquila, 1 February 2023, no. 86
  The objection of compromise is of a procedural nature and integrates a question of competence, which must be raised by the interested party, under penalty of forfeiture and consequent entrenchment at the court seized of the power to decide on the proposed request, in the response appearance and within the term fixed by article 166 of the code of civil procedure.
• Court of Bari, 1 February 2023, no. 334
  Article 808-quater of the code of civil procedure is an expression of the legislator’s favour for the use of alternative dispute resolution instruments to the state jurisdiction, which allows, in the absence of an express manifestation of will to the contrary, to broaden the scope of application of an arbitration clause referring generically to disputes arising from the contract to which the arbitration clause relates, so as to include all disputes having their causa petendi in the contract itself.
• Court of Naples, 2 February 2023, no. 1183
  The arbitration clause contained in an adhesion contract must be specifically approved in writing.
• Court of Teramo, 2 February 2023, no. 69
  For the purposes of identifying the means by which the award is to be challenged, what matters is the nature of the act actually performed by the arbitrators, rather than the nature of the arbitration as envisaged by the parties; therefore, if a ritual award has been pronounced despite the fact that the parties had envisaged an informal arbitration, it follows that that award can be challenged only pursuant to art. 827 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Court of Venice, 6 February 2023, no. 256
  The dispute in which compensation is claimed for damages resulting from alleged unlawful conduct exercised by the defendants in their capacity as shareholders and in the context of the exercise of their voting rights certainly relates to available rights inherent in the corporate relationship and therefore falls within those subject to arbitration, where the articles of association contain an arbitration clause.
• Court of Bergamo, decr. 7 February 2023
  The validity (and therefore also the effectiveness) of the arbitration clause must be assessed independently of the contract to which it refers.
• Court of Venice, 9 February 2023, no. 281
  In relations between arbitrators and state courts, the question of jurisdiction must be decided on the basis of the allegations of the parties, regardless of the merits of the claim.
• Court of Milan, 13 February 2023, no. 1125
  The adherence of the opposing defendant to the indication of the arbitration jurisdiction made by the opposing plaintiff does not entail the applicability of article 38, para. 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, so that the judge cannot pronounce an order to remove the case from the register but, in the exercise of his functional and mandatory jurisdiction over the opposition, must declare by judgment the lack of jurisdiction of the judge who issued the decree and, consequently, the nullity of the same, settling the costs of the litigation.
• Court of Lodi, 14 February 2023, no. 118
  In the case of a contract whose content is derived from general terms and conditions prepared by a contractor, the clause devolving to an arbitration board any dispute between the parties must be specifically and independently approved.
• Court of Santa Maria Capua Vetere, 14 February 2023, no. 580
  The existence of an arbitration arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction, both because the rules of arbitration proceedings, governed by the general rule of respecting the cross-examination of the parties, do not contemplate measures to be issued inaudita altera parte, and because in the monitory proceedings the lack of jurisdiction cannot be detected ex officio since the dispute is referred to arbitrators.
• Court of Florence, 20 February 2023, no. 508
  The arbitration clause included in a company’s memorandum of association, which provides for the possibility of referring disputes between shareholders, disputes between the company and its shareholders as well as disputes brought by directors and statutory auditors, in connection with company business or the interpretation or execution of the company’s bylaws, to arbitrators, does not also include liability actions pursuant to Article 2476 of the Italian Civil Code.
• Court of Latina, 20 February 2023, no. 386
  In the presence of a third party’s own call by the defendant, who claims that passive legitimacy belongs to the third party who is, therefore, involved in the action on the basis of the same title as the defendant, the plaintiff’s claim against the defendant automatically extends to the third party. It follows that the arbitration agreement between the defendant and the third party does not apply.
• Court of Pistoia, 20 February 2023, no. 128
  In the case of a contract between a consumer and a professional, the arbitration clause must be deemed vexatious.
• Court of Turin, 21 February 2023, n. 759
  A dispute challenging the resolution approving the financial statements of a company is not arbitrable, given that the rules intended to guarantee the relevant requirements are not only mandatory but, since they are dictated not only to protect the interest of each shareholder in being informed of the company’s management performance at the end of each financial year also of the trust of all the persons who enter into a relationship with the company, who are entitled to know the equity and financial situation of the entity, transcend the interest of the individual and belong, therefore, to non-transferable rights.
• Court of Florence, 24 February 2023, no. 554
  The statutory arbitration clause is not applicable to the liability action brought by the administrator pursuant to Article 146 of the bankruptcy law.
• Court of Rome, 24 February 2023, no. 3205
  The dispute concerning the payment of the price agreed upon for the sale of the shares is entirely extraneous to the company’s relationship with the company and is therefore not attributed to the jurisdiction of the arbitration court under the arbitration clause contained in the company’s bylaws.
• Court of Venice, 24 February 2023, no. 372
  Even where the arbitration clause does not adequately identify the arbitral institution called upon to administer the proceedings, the arbitration agreement must be read as extensively as possible by virtue of the so-called “favor arbitrati” principle and therefore an interpretation that gives meaning to the choice made by the parties, who undoubtedly did not opt for the jurisdiction of the state court, pursuant to Article 808-quater of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure.
• Court of Rome, 27 February 2023, no. 3255
  Where there are several related claims, only some of which fall within the jurisdiction of arbitration, the latter is absorbed and excluded from the ordinary jurisdiction [per incuriam with respect to Article 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure].
• Court of Naples, 1 March 2023, no. 2228
  In the face of several connected claims, only some of which fall within the jurisdiction of arbitration, the latter is absorbed and excluded from the ordinary jurisdiction, given the need for simultaneus processus and the natural prevalence of state jurisdiction over arbitration [per incuriam with respect to art. 819-ter of the code of civil procedure].
• Court of Venice, ord, 2 March 2023
  The judicial authority retains the power of caution where, despite the commencement of arbitration proceedings, the body is not yet constituted.
• Court of Venice, 2 March 2023, No. 411
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the State Court’s jurisdiction to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not provide for the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of such clause, to declare the opposed decree null and void and at the same time to refer the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Florence, 6 March 2023, no. 674
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not contemplate the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of such clause, to declare the nullity of the opposed decree and at the same time refer the dispute to arbitrators.
• Court of Rome, 7 March 2023, no. 3752
  In the presence of an arbitration clause in the articles of association, the dispute relating to a shareholder’s contribution obligation, even when brought pursuant to Article 150 of the Bankruptcy Law, is referred to arbitration.
• Court of Lecco, 13 March 2023, no. 145
  The arbitration clause generically referring to disputes arising from a contract must be interpreted in the sense of ascribing to arbitration jurisdiction all disputes referring to claims having their causa petendi in the contract to which the arbitration clause is annexed, with the consequent exclusion of disputes in respect of which that contract is merely a historical premise.
• Court of Taranto, 15 March 2023, No. 585
  On the subject of general terms and conditions of contracts, the effectiveness of onerous clauses – which include the arbitration clause – is subject to specific approval in writing only in cases where the clauses are included in negotiated structures intended to regulate an indefinite series of relationships, both from a substantive point of view (i.e., if they are drafted by a contracting party performing contractual activity for an undifferentiated plurality of persons) and from a formal point of view (i.e., if they are predetermined in their content by means of forms or forms to be used in series); the mere activity of drafting the contractual regulations is to be kept distinct from the drafting of the general terms and conditions of the contract, since contractual terms and conditions drafted by one of the parties in anticipation of and with reference to a single, specific transaction, and to which the other party may, quite legitimately, request to make the necessary amendments after having freely appreciated their content, cannot be considered as such.
• Court of Naples, 21 March 2023, no. 3037
  Neither the conferral on the arbitrators of the power to decide according to equity, i.e. in the capacity of amicable arbitrators, nor the prior attribution to the arbitral decision of the character of non-appealability, nor the provision of the exemption of the arbitrators from the obligation to make the arbitration decision in accordance with the law of the state of the country in which the contract is to be concluded, can be considered decisive elements to configure the arbitration as informal and to exclude the ritual arbitration, nor the provision that the arbitrators be exempt from procedural formalities, since, for the purposes of a correct interpretation of the parties’ will in the sense of ritual arbitration, terminological expressions congruent with the activity of judging and with the result of a judgement on a dispute must be used.
• Court of Pisa, 21 March 2023, no. 431
  The procedural conduct of the defendant, who remained contumacious, together with the peaceful non-detectability ex officio of the objection of compromise, allow for the jurisdiction of the state court to be confirmed, even in the presence of an arbitration clause in the contract underlying the claim.
• Court of Civitavecchia, 22 March 2023, no. 307
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not contemplate the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of said clause, to declare the nullity of the opposed decree and the simultaneous submission of the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Milan, 24 March 2023, no. 2412
  The arbitration clause contained in a company’s by-laws, which, failing to comply with the requirement of Article 34 of Legislative Decree No. 5 of 17 January 2003, does not provide that the appointment of arbitrators must be made by a person extraneous to the company, is null and void even in the case of an informal arbitration.
• Court of Torre Annunziata, 24 March 2023, no. 854
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not provide for the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of such clause, to declare the nullity of the opposed decree and the simultaneous submission of the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Naples, 27 March 2023, no. 3225
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not provide for the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the ordinary court, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of such a clause, to declare the opposed decree null and void and at the same time to refer the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Venice, 27 March 2023, no. 549
  The dispute in which the liquidation of the share due to a shareholder following withdrawal is sought certainly concerns disposable rights inherent in the corporate relationship and therefore falls within those subject to arbitral jurisdiction, where the company’s articles of association contain an arbitration clause.
• Court of Naples, 28 March 2023, no. 3246
  The self-assessment of fees by arbitrators is a source of obligation only in the event it is accepted by both parties, failing which the arbitrators must necessarily resort to the procedure pursuant to Article 814 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, or resort to ordinary proceedings at the initiative of the parties themselves.
• Court of Bologna, 30 March 2023, no. 732
  The arbitration clause included in a company’s memorandum of association, which provides for the possibility of referring to arbitrators only disputes between the shareholders and those between the company and the shareholders, does not also include the liability action pursuant to Article 2476 of the Italian Civil Code brought by the shareholder against the director, since it is irrelevant that the latter is also a shareholder of the company.
• Court of Venice, 30 March 2023, no. 578
  The first sentence of Article 819-ter(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, in providing that the jurisdiction of the arbitrators is not excluded by the connection between the dispute referred to them and a case pending before the ordinary courts, implies, with reference to the hypothesis in which a plurality of claims has been brought, that the existence of the arbitral jurisdiction is to be verified with specific regard to each of them, as it is not possible to refer the entire dispute to the arbitrators (or to the ordinary courts) by virtue of the mere connection; Therefore, where the related claims do not give rise to a necessary lis pendens, the acceptance of the regulation of jurisdiction entails the separation of the cases, since the proceedings may well continue before different courts by reason of the derogation and availability of the rules on jurisdiction.
• Court of Rome, 31 March 2023, no. 5248
  In informal arbitration, given its nature aimed at integrating a manifestation of the will of the parties in substitution for that of the conflicting parties, the award can be challenged only for flaws that may affect such manifestation of will, with the consequent exclusion of the challenge for nullity provided for by Article 828 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure; therefore, the error of the arbitral judgement, deducible in the challenge, in order to be relevant, must integrate the essentiality and recognisability required by Articles 1429 and 1431 of the Italian Civil Code, while the error committed by the arbitrators with reference to the determination adopted on the basis of the conviction reached after interpreting and examining the elements acquired is not relevant.
• Court of Teramo, 4 April 2023, no. 320
  In the presence of a simultaneous proposal before the ordinary court of several related claims, some of which fall within its jurisdiction and others within the jurisdiction of the irritual arbitrators, there is no vis attractiva of the latter towards the ordinary court. This solution, however, does not derive from the application of article 818-ter of the code of civil procedure, a rule governing the relationship between judicial authorities and (ritual) arbitrators, but from the observation in general terms of the irritual arbitration as an instrument that excludes judicial protection and with it any analogical application of the procedural rules dictated for ritual arbitration.
• Court of Milan, 11 April 2023, no. 2899
  The right of a company director to remuneration for the office held is unquestionably a property right available to its owner, therefore it is and remains absolutely compromisable.
• Court of Pisa, 13 April 2023, no. 539
  The irreconcilable contrast between two provisions – one founding arbitral jurisdiction, the other indicating a conventional forum – must be resolved in favour of the confirmation of ordinary jurisdiction, arbitration being an exception to the former.
• Court of Venice, 14 April 2023, no. 641
  There is no coincidence between the sphere of nullities and the narrower area of the unavailability of the right, since the latter area exclusively includes irremediable nullities, for which only the regime of absolute non-derogation and therefore the absolute unavailability and non-compromisability of the relative right remains. Consequently, the dispute concerning the nullity of a corporate resolution due to the shareholder’s failure to be convened, subject to the amnesty regime set forth in Article 2379-ter of the Italian Civil Code, may be referred to arbitrators.
• Court of Venice, 14 April 2023, no. 642
  The dispute challenging the resolution approving the company’s financial statements for lack of the requirements of truth, clarity and precision cannot be submitted to arbitration.
• Court of Venice, 14 April 2023, no. 643
  Even in the case of a challenge to corporate resolutions, the existence of arbitral jurisdiction must be verified with specific regard to each of them, since the entire dispute cannot be referred to arbitrators (or to the ordinary courts) by virtue of the mere connection.
• Court of Florence, 17 April 2023, no. 1134
  The arbitration clause included in a company’s memorandum of association, which provides for the possibility of referring disputes between shareholders and disputes between the company and its shareholders to arbitration, cannot be automatically extended to disputes involving directors, liquidators or statutory auditors, as it is necessary for this purpose that there be an express extension of the scope of the clause.
• Court of Vicenza, 17 April 2023, no. 701
  The deduction of the existence of an arbitration agreement or an arbitration clause for informal arbitration does not entail a jurisdictional issue, since it entails the inadmissibility of the request for waiver of the action, given that, with informal arbitration, the arbitrators are entrusted with the performance of a negotiation activity in substitution of the parties, and certainly not with the exercise of a jurisdictional function.
• Court of L’Aquila, 19 April 2023, no. 275
  The arbitration clause contained in the articles of association of a company, which provides for the devolution to arbitrators of disputes connected to the company contract, must be deemed to extend also to the dispute concerning the shareholder’s withdrawal from the company.
• Court of Bologna, 19 April 2023, no. 879
  Only those disputes concerning the challenge of shareholders’ meeting resolutions having an unlawful or impossible object, which give rise to nullity that can also be raised ex officio by the judge, to which are equated, pursuant to Article 2479-ter of the Italian Civil Code, those taken in the absolute absence of information, in the absence of the right to withdraw from the company, with those taken in the absolute absence of the right to withdraw from the company, those taken in the absolute absence of information, so that the dispute concerning the invalidity of the shareholders’ meeting resolution for failure to convene the shareholder, being subject to the system of amnesty provided for by Article 2379-bis of the Italian Civil Code, can be referred to arbitrators.
• Court of Ravenna, 19 April 2023, no. 293
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the ordinary judge’s jurisdiction to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not contemplate the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of said clause, to declare the opposed decree null and void and at the same time to refer the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Cosenza, 20 April 2023, no. 705
  The right of the arbitrators to receive payment of their fees arises from the fact that they have actually performed the task conferred on them, within the framework of the mandate relationship between the parties, and is independent of the validity and effectiveness of the award, with the result that the right to receive remuneration for the performance of the mandate is not affected in the event of the invalidity of the award itself.
• Court of Bari, 24 April 2023, no. 1519
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not provide for the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of subsequent opposition based on the existence of said clause, to declare the nullity of the opposed decree and the simultaneous submission of the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Civitavecchia, 24 April 2023, no. 446
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the ordinary court’s jurisdiction to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not provide for the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of said clause, to declare the opposed decree null and void and at the same time to refer the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Naples, 24 April 2023, no. 4217
  The arbitration clause for foreign arbitration does not require specific approval in writing, but is valid and operative when it results from a document signed by the contracting parties, from which emerges the unequivocal will of both parties to refer any disputes arising from the performance of the contract to foreign arbitrators [obiter].
• Court of Florence, 26 April 2023, no. 1256
  An arbitration clause in the articles of association devolving to arbitrators all disputes arising between shareholders or between shareholders and the company, directors, liquidators or auditors, having as their object disposable rights relating to the company’s relationship, does not concern disputes between the company and directors.
• Court of Milan, 26 April 2023, no. 3333
  An arbitration clause providing for the devolution to arbitrators of disputes arising in the course of the relationship, accompanied by another clause attributing jurisdiction to a state court, must be interpreted as meaning that disputes between the parties are referred to the jurisdiction of arbitrators only during the relationship, but no longer after its termination.
• Court of Bari, 28 April 2023, no. 1594
  The arbitration clause referring generically to disputes arising out of the contract shall be interpreted, in the absence of express will to the contrary, as covering all and only disputes having causa petendi in the contract itself and does not extend its effects to disputes relating to another contract even if related to the main one.
• Court of Patti, 28 April 2023, no. 418
  The existence of an arbitration clause devolving to an arbitration board all disputes that may arise between the parties does not exclude per se – without an express reference – that the alternative jurisdiction of the state court may apply to any dispute that may arise.
• Court of Patti, 28 April 2023, No. 420
  The existence of an arbitration clause devolving to an arbitration board all disputes that may arise between the parties does not exclude per se – without an express reference – that the alternative jurisdiction of the state court may apply to any disputes that may arise.
• Court of Turin, 28 April 2023, no. 1819
  The action for ascertainment of the usucaption of certain real estate owned by a company, brought by its shareholders, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration to which the company’s by-laws entrust disputes on disposable rights relating to the company’s relationship.
• Court of Florence, ord. 3 May 2023
  The jurisdiction of the State Courts to issue interim measures must be ascertained at the time the application is made, it being irrelevant that at a later time, prior to the issuance of the decision, the arbitral tribunal was constituted.
• Court of Palermo, 4 May 2023, no. 2095
  The dispute between the trustor and the trustee does not concern the corporate relationship and with respect to it that relationship is merely a prerequisite, extraneous to the matter in dispute, and therefore incapable of justifying the attribution of the dispute to the jurisdiction of the arbitrators.
• Court of Catania, 5 May 2023, no. 1968
  In the event of a company’s bankruptcy, the arbitration clause contained in the company’s articles of association is not applicable to the liability action brought jointly by the liquidator pursuant to Article 146 of the bankruptcy law, which is aimed at reinstating the company’s assets as a guarantee for both shareholders and company creditors and which includes both the action provided for by Article 2393 of the Italian Civil Code and the action provided for by Article 2394 of the Italian Civil Code, in reference to which the arbitration clause cannot operate since the creditors are third parties with respect to the company.
• Court of Naples, 8 May 2023, no. 1674
  Only disputes relating to the challenge of shareholders’ meeting resolutions of companies having an unlawful or impossible object, which give rise to nullity that can also be raised ex officio by the judge, to which are equated, pursuant to Article 2479-ter of the Italian Civil Code, those taken in the absolute absence of information.
• Court of Naples, 8 May 2023, No. 4678
  The arbitration clause by which disputes on the interpretation or performance of the contract to which it relates are referred to arbitrators, in the absence of express will to the contrary, attributes to arbitration jurisdiction only those disputes that refer to claims having their causa petendi in the contract itself, thus excluding that such disputes may include non-contractual liability suits, which have in the contract only a factual premise.
• Court of Bari, 9 May 2023, no. 1764
  “Irrituale” arbitration is aimed at the issuance of a contractual determination having the effects of a contract between the parties. This peculiarity of “irrituale” arbitration is reflected with regard to its possible appeal: in fact, Article 828 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure does not apply, which, with regard to the award, allows to file an appeal before the Court of appeal, whereas the proper venue to hear an appeal against an “irrituale” award will always be the Court of first instance.
• Court of Patti, 12 May 2023, No. 490
  In “irrituale” arbitration, an award may be challenged for essential error only when the will of the arbitrators has been diverted by an altered perception or by a false representation of the reality and of the factual elements submitted to their examination (so-called error of fact), and not also when the deviation relates to the assessment of a reality whose elements have been exactly perceived (so-called error of assessment). As a consequence, the arbitration award cannot be challenged on the ground of errores in iudicando, not even when they consist in an erroneous interpretation of the same contract entered into by the parties, which gave rise to the mandate to the arbitrators; nor, more generally, is the arbitration award voidable on the ground of erroneous application of the rules of contractual hermeunics or, a fortiori, on the ground of an appreciation of the contractual results that differs from that considered by the arbitrators and does not conform to the expectations of the challenging party. It follows that the irritual arbitration award cannot be challenged for errors of law, but only for flaws that may vitiate any manifestation of negotiating will, such as error, violence, wilful misconduct or incapacity of the parties that conferred the task and of the arbitrator himself.
• Court of Santa Maria Capua Vetere, 16 May 2023, no. 1952
  The arbitration clause by which disputes on the interpretation or performance of the contract to which it accedes are referred to arbitrators, in the absence of an express will to the contrary, ascribes to arbitration jurisdiction only disputes that refer to claims having their causa petendi in the contract itself, thus excluding that such disputes may include non-contractual liability suits, which have in the contract only a factual premise.
• Court of Potenza, 17 May 2023, no. 610
  The fact that the parties cannot dispose of the right constitutes the limit to recourse to the arbitration clause and should not be confused with the fact that the parties cannot derogate the law applicable to the legal relationship, which does not prevent it from being heard by arbitrators, whereby the violation of the mandatory rule can be ascertained without determining with the award effects prohibited by law.
• Court of Naples North, 23 May 2023, no. 2136
  In view of the acceptance of the objection of compromise, given the procedural settlement, there are serious and exceptional reasons to award the costs between the parties.
• Court of Piacenza, 24 May 2023, no. 309
  The “irrituale” arbitral award can only be challenged on the grounds of flaws that may vitiate any manifestation of the parties will, such as error, violence, wilful misconduct and incapacity of the parties appointed the arbitrator, or of the arbitrator himself: in particular, the relevant error is only the one pertaining to the formation of the will of the arbitrators, which is configured when they have had a false representation of reality due to not having seen the elements of the dispute or having assumed others to be non-existent, or for having given as contested facts that were undisputed or vice versa, while any challenge is precluded for errors of law, both with regard to the assessment of the evidence, and with reference to the suitability of the decision adopted to settle the dispute.
• Court of Benevento, 25 May 2023, no. 1188
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not provide for the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of subsequent opposition based on the existence of said clause, to declare the decree opposed null and void and at the same time to refer the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Rome, 25 May 2023, no. 8280
  In the event of a company’s bankruptcy, the arbitration clause contained in its articles of association is not applicable to the liability action brought by the receiver pursuant to Article 146 of the bankruptcy law.
• Court of Messina, 29 May 2023, no. 1058
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary judge to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not provide for the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of said clause, to declare the nullity of the opposed decree and the simultaneous submission of the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Milan, 30 May 2023, no. 4467
  The enforceability against the bankruptcy of the arbitration clause in the company’s article of association does not preclude the Court from hearing the liability action brought by the mass of creditors with reference to all the charges pursuant to Article 2394-bis of the Italian Civil Code.
• Court of Cosenza, 1 June 2023, no. 981
  With the introduction of Art. 808-ter of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, the legislature intended to formalise the possible grounds of appeal against an arbitration award by crystallising them in an exhaustive list and thus removing them from the hermeneutic identification of doctrine and jurisprudence.
• Court of Florence, 5 June 2023, no. 1666
  In the relationship between State Courts and arbitral tribunal, Art. 38, para. 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not apply, so that the State Court that, accepting the objection to its jurisdiction, declares that the arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction, shall also provide for the costs of the proceedings.
• Court of Taranto, 5 June 2023, No. 1312
  All disputes that find their matrix in the intervening contract shall be deemed to be referred to arbitration, even if they arose at a time subsequent to the exhaustion of the contractual relationship, provided that they relate to situations constituted by it.
• Court of Turin, 5 June 2023, no. 2310
  The arbitration clause, in the absence of an express will to the contrary, must be interpreted in the sense of ascribing to the arbitral jurisdiction all disputes referring to claims having causa petendi in the contract to which said clause is annexed.
• Court of Ragusa, 7 June 2023, no. 925
  The presence of an arbitration clause does not in abstract prevent the creditor from requesting and obtaining from the ordinary courts an injunction for the claim arising out of the contract, without prejudice to the right of the defendant to object to the arbitral competence in the opposition, with the consequent need for the latter judge to revoke the injunction and send the parties before the sole arbitrator or the arbitration board.
• Court of Bari, 8 June 2023, no. 2260
  In the event of a company’s bankruptcy, the arbitration clause contained in the company’s bylaws is not applicable to liability actions brought by the bankruptcy receiver pursuant to Article 146 of the bankruptcy law.
• Court of Milan, 9 June 2023, no. 4870
  The decisive aspect in reaching the conclusion of the arbitrability, or non-arbitrability, of disputes concerning challenges to corporate resolutions is to be found in the statement of facts concretely provided by the parties and the interests specifically involved. In other words, and as a general rule, it must be held that, in order to deny or allow arbitration of disputes concerning the challenge of corporate resolutions affecting the share capital (in terms of its increase and/or reduction), it must be verified whether or not they affect, respectively, the super-individual interests of the company, the shareholders and third parties, the protection of which is ensured, or not, through the provision of mandatory rules that, if violated, would determine the legal system’s reaction, free from any party initiative. Therefore, where the involvement of such interests is not directly affected by the subject matter of the lawsuit, it must be ruled out that one is in the presence of non-transferable rights, with the consequent possibility, in the presence of an arbitration clause contained in the deed of incorporation or in the company’s bylaws, of submitting the aforementioned disputes to arbitration.
• Court of Milan, 13 June 2023, no. 4926
  The opposing party’s adherence to the objection of the opposing party that the court that issued the injunction lacks jurisdiction, because the arbitrators have jurisdiction in its place, entails, pursuant to Article 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure, that the court before which the action has been brought is excluded from any power to decide on jurisdiction and consequently to rule on the costs of the proceedings relating to the phase held before it, since the arbitrators must do so.
• Court of Milan, 16 June 2023, no. 5015
  Failure to approve the arbitration clause in writing pursuant to Articles 1341 and 1342 of the Italian Civil Code allows its nullity to be affirmed; nullity which, according to the prevailing case law, may be objected to or detected ex officio at any stage and level of the proceedings.
• Court of Rome, 16 June 2023, No. 9614
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction (given that the rules governing arbitration proceedings do not contemplate the issuance of precautionary measures) but requires the latter, in the event of subsequent opposition based on the existence of the said clause, to declare the nullity of the opposed decree and its simultaneous revocation.
• Court of Rome, 16 June 2023, no. 9620
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts to issue an injunction (given that the rules governing arbitration proceedings do not contemplate the issuance of precautionary measures) but requires the latter, in the event of subsequent opposition based on the existence of said clause, to declare the nullity of the opposed decree and its simultaneous revocation.
• Court of Turin, 19 June 2023, no. 2596
  Questions concerning directors’ remuneration may also be submitted to arbitration if the articles of association provide for an arbitration clause to resolve disputes between directors and the company.
• Court of Parma, 22 June 2023, no. 851
  Article 819-ter, para. 3 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure provides that, pending arbitration proceedings, no claim for invalidity or ineffectiveness of the arbitration agreement may be brought before the courts, so that such a claim may be brought only when no dispute has been brought before the arbitrators on the basis of the agreement itself.
• Court of Rome, 22 June 2023, no. 9977
  In the presence of an arbitration clause in the articles of association, the disputes referred to in Article 2476(7) of the Italian Civil Code concerning the compensation of damages due to individual shareholders who have been directly harmed by the negligent acts of the directors are also subject to arbitration.
• Court of Naples, 26 June 2023, no. 6532
  The arbitration clause, due to its restrictive nature of the right to judicial protection, must be interpreted strictly, with the consequence that a clause referring to the resolution of disputes inherent in the operative moment of the contract but cannot apply to the request for payment of emoluments already accrued [per incuriam].
• Court of Florence, 27 June 2023, no. 1987
  On the subject of the liability of company directors, where the relative action is brought against a plurality of persons, a situation of necessary joinder does not arise between the defendants. Their procedural positions may therefore be separated and if only one of the defendants has objected to the lack of jurisdiction of the state court, on the ground that the arbitrators have jurisdiction, the proceedings before the same state court may continue against the other defendants.
• Court of Bari, 28 June 2023, no. 2592
  The signing of the bill of lading, while implying the consignee’s acceptance of the contract of carriage by sea, cannot be construe as acceptance of an arbitration clause for foreign arbitration in the absence of an express and specific reference to the latter, since the arbitral agreement has to be made in writing.
• Court of Milan, ord. 28 June 2023
  The clause in the articles of association of a consortium that provides for the competence of the board of probiviers, appointed by the assembly, for all disputes that may arise between the consortium members and between them and the consortium and its organs is ineffective.
• Court of Palermo, 28 June 2023, no. 3165
  Having regard to the nature of the action brought by the liquidator, which does not derive from the bankruptcy, but relates to a right of the bankrupt that existed prior to the commencement of the bankruptcy proceedings, the bankruptcy trustee acts as a representative of the bankrupt and not of the mass of creditors, asserting a benefit deriving from the performance of a contract, containing an arbitration clause; hence the continuity of the operation of the negotiating mechanism protected by the arbitration clause stipulated by the person already bankrupt, which is enforceable against the liquidator and, on its behalf, the assumptor.
• Court of Santa Maria Capua Vetere, 3 July 2023, no. 2757
  The question relating to the determination of the objective scope of the arbitration clause integrates a question whose solution requires, through the interpretation of the clause according to the normal hermeneutic codified canons dictated for the interpretation of contracts, the investigation of and determination of the common intention of the parties as to the objective content that they intended to give to the clause.
• Court of Florence, 4 July 2023, no. 2076
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction, but requires the latter, in the event of subsequent opposition based on the existence of such a clause, to declare the opposed decree null and void and at the same time to refer the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Palermo, 4 July 2023, no. 3287
  Irregular arbitration being an atypical institution, derogatory to the typical institution regulated by law and lacking the guarantees provided by the legislator, it must be held that, in the absence of a derogatory intention clearly inferable from the compromise or arbitration clause, the parties’ reference to the resolution of certain disputes by arbitration normally constitutes an expression of their intention to refer to regular arbitration, i.e. to the typical institution regulated by the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Court of Milan, 5 July 2023, no. 5586
  The dispute relating to the breach of the auditor’s right to receive the remuneration approved by the shareholders’ meeting pursuant to Article 2402 of the Italian Civil Code, even assuming the non-derogation of the rule requiring the shareholders’ meeting to provide for the remuneration for the entire duration of the term of office in order to protect the auditor’s independence in the exercise of his supervisory role, does not involve the breach of general rules protecting third parties outside the company, but only the infringement of an individual property right of the member of the supervisory body that is fully available to its owner.
• Court of Milan, 5 July 2023, no. 5587
  The dispute relating to the breach of the auditor’s right to receive the remuneration approved by the shareholders’ meeting pursuant to Article 2402 of the Italian Civil Code, even assuming the non-derogation of the rule requiring the shareholders’ meeting to provide for the remuneration for the entire duration of the term of office in order to protect the auditor’s independence in the exercise of his supervisory role, does not involve the breach of general rules protecting third parties outside the company, but only the infringement of an individual property right of the member of the supervisory body that is fully available to its owner.
• Court of Turin, 6 July 2023, no. 2925
  The arbitration clause in the articles of association entrenches arbitral competence also for past events, notwithstanding the termination of the director’s office.
• Court of Salerno, 7 July 2023, no. 3112
  In order for there to be an obligation of specific approval in writing of the arbitration clause pursuant to Art. 1341(2) of the Italian Civil Code, it is not sufficient that one of the contracting parties has approved the arbitration clause, it is not sufficient that one of the contracting parties has drawn up the entire content of the contract in such a way that the other party has no choice but to accept or reject it in its entirety, but it is also necessary that the scheme has been drawn up and the general terms and conditions have been fixed to serve an indefinite series of relationships, both from a substantial point of view, because they have been drawn up by a contracting party that performs contractual activity for an undifferentiated plurality of parties, and from a formal point of view, because their content has been predetermined by means of forms or forms that can be used in series.
• Court of Prato, 8 July 2023, no. 455
  An arbitration clause that delegates the appointment of arbitrators to a person outside the company who is not identified in advance, but who is designated by the parties to the arbitration proceedings and, in the absence of agreement between them, by the President of the Court, is not incompatible with the provision of Article 34(2) of Legislative Decree No. 5/2003.
• Court of Bologna, 10 July 2023, no. 1396
  The dispute challenging the resolution approving the financial statements for lack of the requirements of truth, clarity and precision is not arbitrable, since it concerns non-transferable rights.
• Court of Bologna, 10 July 2023, no. 1404
  The arbitration clause contained in a contract for the sale of company shares does not extend to the allegedly connected trust transaction.
• Court of Milan, 10 July 2023, no. 5778
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary court to issue an injunction (given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not provide for the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte), but requires the latter, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of said clause, to declare the opposed decree null and void and at the same time to refer the dispute to the arbitrators.
• Court of Bologna, 11 July 2023, no. 1426
  The arbitration clause in the articles of association concerning disputes between the company and its shareholders and between shareholders and each other does not extend to disputes between the company and the director, even if the latter is a shareholder.
• Court of Naples, 12 July 2023, no. 7179
  The dispute concerning the challenge of the resolution approving the financial statements for lack of the requirements of truth, clarity and precision is not arbitrable since it concerns non-transferable rights.
• Court of Rome, 12 July 2023, no. 11126
  What matters, in order to ascertain whether or not the dispute can be arbitrated, is not the subject matter of the resolution or whether it involves individual interests of individual shareholders or interests of a more general nature, such as those protecting the company or the community of shareholders.
• Court of Trieste, 12 July 2023, no. 376
  It is not in the slightest doubt that the liability action, as is evident from the fact that it is expressly allowed to be waived and settled, against the members of the corporate bodies concerns available property rights and, therefore, there is nothing to prevent it from being arbitrable, not even where, pursuant to Article 2476, para. 3 of the Italian Civil Code, it is brought by the shareholder.
• Court of Pavia, 17 July 2023, no. 915
  The submission of a counterclaim by the defendant who has preliminarily objected to the lack of jurisdiction of the state court, on the ground that the arbitrators have jurisdiction, does not imply a waiver of the objection, since the examination of the counterclaim is ontologically conditioned by the failure to uphold the objection of compromise, the validity of the latter being incompatible with the examination of the counterclaim.
• Court of Rome, ord. 17 July 2023
  For the purposes of assessing the set-off of litigation costs, no relevance whatsoever can be attributed to the procedural conduct of the party that accedes to the opposing party’s objection of lack of jurisdiction formulated on the basis of an arbitration clause.
• Court of Bologna, 21 July 2023, no. 1559
  In view of the ritual nature of arbitration, and its function as a substitute for ordinary jurisdiction, the objection to an arbitration clause has a procedural character and constitutes a question of jurisdiction, to which Article 819-ter of the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable.
• Court of Lamezia Terme, ord. 21 July 2023
  The award of costs and remuneration made directly by the arbitrators has the value of a mere contractual proposal, which becomes binding only if accepted by (all) the disputants, so that the party that has not accepted such proposal has no interest in challenging the part of the arbitral award concerning the award of legal costs and fees, as well as the arbitrators’ fees, the secretary’s fee and the expenses of the board of arbitrators.
• Court of Ascoli Piceno, 25 July 2023, No. 495
  The procedural conduct of a respondent in an action who, after having raised an objection to arbitration, does not limit itself to formulating mere defences and raising exceptions in the proper sense, but proposes a counterclaim, does not imply any waiver of the objection formulated. In fact, even in the event of the simultaneous submission of the objection of compromise and counterclaim, the former cannot be considered as waived by reason of the formulation of the latter, since the examination of the counterclaim is ontologically conditioned on the non-acceptance of the objection of compromise, the merits of the latter being incompatible with the examination of the counterclaim.
• Court of Ancona, 27 July 2023, no. 969
  In order to exclude the possibility of an arbitration challenge to shareholders’ meeting resolutions, it is necessary to allege that they are unlawful due to violation of mandatory rules. It follows, therefore, that while it is true that corporate disputes may be the subject of compromise, it is equally undeniable that the arbitration clause that may be included in the deed of incorporation is destined to remain inoperative for those disputes in which the violation of mandatory rules, intended to protect the collective interest of shareholders or third parties extraneous to the company, is at issue.
• Court of Naples, 27 July 2023, no. 7910
  The use of the verb “power” rather than “duty” in the context of an arbitration clause expresses only a mere opportunity to devolve potential disputes, which might arise between the parties, to a board of arbitrators rather than to the judicial authority and therefore does not represent an obligation for the parties. The logical consequence of this assumption is that the parties are allowed to derogate from this contractual clause by simply instituting proceedings before the state authority without necessarily having to refer the matter to the arbitration board.

• Court of Venice, 27 July 2023, no. 1390
  The arbitration clause contained in a contract that constitutes a mere factual historical premise of the claim brought before the court does not give the arbitrators jurisdiction to hear it.
• Court of Rome, 28 July 2023, no. 11897
  The presence of an arbitration clause does not in abstract prevent the creditor from requesting and obtaining from the ordinary courts an injunction for the claim arising from the contract, without prejudice to the right of the defendant to object to the arbitral competence in the opposition, with the consequent need for the latter judge to revoke the injunction and send the parties to the sole arbitrator or to the arbitration board.
• Court of Venice, 28 July 2023, no. 1407
  On the subject of assignment of credit, the assignee of a credit arising from a contract in which an arbitration clause is included does not take over the ownership of the separate and autonomous arbitration agreement and may not, therefore, invoke that clause against the assigned debtor; On the other hand, the latter may invoke the arbitration clause against the assignee, since it is one of the exceptions enforceable against the original creditor and since, otherwise, it would be deprived of the right to have disputes over the claim decided by arbitration on the basis of an agreement between the assignor and the assignee to which it was not party.
• Court of Lecce, 2 August 2023, no. 2314
  In the hypothesis in which an arbitration clause in the articles of association entrusts the appointment of the arbitral tribunal to a non-existent subject, the provisions of Article 34(2) of Legislative Decree 5/2003 (now Article 838-bis(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure) come into play [obiter].
• Court of Milan, 3 August 2023, no. 6679
  The dispute brought by the company against the directors to obtain compensation for the damage resulting from their mala gestio conduct undoubtedly concerns a disposable property right and may therefore be referred to arbitrators.
• Court of Bologna, 4 August 2023, no. 1657
  Only disputes relating to challenges to shareholders’ meeting resolutions of companies having an unlawful or impossible object, which give rise to nullity that can also be raised ex officio by the judge, to which are equated, pursuant to Article 2479-ter of the Italian Civil Code, those taken in absolute terms of information, belong to non-transferable rights, and as such cannot be arbitrated.
• Court of Bologna, 4 August 2023, no. 1660
  In the event of a company’s bankruptcy, the arbitration clause contained in the company’s bylaws is not applicable to the liability action brought jointly by the liquidator pursuant to Article 146 of the bankruptcy law for the reinstatement of the company’s assets as a guarantee for both shareholders and company creditors, which includes both the action provided for by Article 2393 of the Italian Civil Code and the action provided for by Article 2394 of the Italian Civil Code, in respect of which the arbitration clause cannot operate since the creditors are third parties with respect to the company.
• Court of Milan, 4 August 2023, no. 6685
  The arbitration clause contained in the company’s by-laws is opposable to the receiver acting pursuant to Article 146 of the bankruptcy law with reference only to the action pursuant to Article 2393 of the Italian Civil Code, as this is a social action that places the receiver in the same position as the company in bonis vis-à-vis the directors and statutory auditors, whereas it is not opposable to the receiver acting pursuant to Article 2394 of the Italian Civil Code, as the company’s creditors are extraneous to the relationship established between the company and its bodies.
• Court of Benevento, 9 August 2023, no. 1721
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the Ordinary Judge to issue an injunction, given that the rules of arbitration proceedings do not contemplate the issuance of orders inaudita altera parte and given the non-recoverability ex officio of the lack of jurisdiction, but in the case of an objection to the aforementioned injunction, the ordered debtor may object to the jurisdiction of the arbitration court, with the consequent lack of jurisdiction of the ordinary judge, who, having ascertained the existence of a valid arbitration clause, can only refer the dispute to the arbitration board.
• Court of Venice, ord. 12 August 2023
  Even in the presence of an arbitration clause, the Court retains the power to suspend the shareholders’ meeting resolution already challenged before the arbitrators with a vicarious and supplementary role of the latter where the arbitration body has not yet been constituted or does not actually have the opportunity to intervene effectively, as happens in the interim between the commencement of the arbitration body’s appointment procedure and its settlement.
• Court of Catanzaro, 17 August 2023, No. 1293
  The dispute challenging the resolution approving the financial statements of a company for lack of the requirements of truth, clarity and precision cannot be submitted to arbitration.
• Court of Venice, 18 August 2023, no. 1476
  Having assessed the inseparable nature of the company’s liability action against the directors and that of the company’s creditors, it must necessarily be concluded that the arbitration clause included in the by-laws of a limited liability company is inoperative, given the circumstance that the perimeter of the said clause cannot, not even in the abstract, include the action pertaining to the company’s creditors.
• Court of Brescia, 21 August 2023, no. 2161
  An arbitration clause in a statute providing that each party shall appoint its own arbitrator is null and void insofar as it is not adequate within the terms of Articles 223-bis and 223-duodecies of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure.
• Court of Salerno, 22 August 2023, no. 3579
  The arbitration clause contained in a particular contract does not extend its effects to disputes relating to another contract, even if related to the allegedly main one.
• Court of Modena, 24 August 2023, no. 1361
  The written form is a requisite for the validity of an arbitration clause; such requisite does not however require that the will of the parties to the arbitration clause be indefectibly expressed in a single document bearing the simultaneous signature of both parties, as it may also be achieved by the exchange of letters respectively containing the proposal and the acceptance of the referral of the dispute to arbitrators, the request for the constitution of an arbitration board and the acceptance thereof being interpreted as a concordant will to settle the dispute in arbitration.
• Court of Naples, 24 August 2023, no. 8108
  The relationship between ordinary judge and board of arbitrators is not defined in terms of the relationship between two distinct jurisdictions, but in terms of competence as expressly provided for by article 819-ter of the code of civil procedure.
• Court of Cosenza, 30 August 2023, no. 1398
  The right of arbitrators to receive payment of their fees arises from the fact that they have actually performed the task conferred on them, within the framework of the mandate relationship existing between the parties, and is independent of the validity and effectiveness of the award, with the result that the right to receive remuneration for the performance of the mandate is not affected in the event of invalidity of the award.
• Court of Genoa, 29 August 2023, no. 2048
  Arbitration clauses impose arbitral jurisdiction for disputes relating to facts that occurred and rights that arose during the period in which the parties were bound, it being irrelevant that the corporate relationship subsequently ceased to exist.
• Court of Vicenza, 30 August 2023, no. 1574
  Where a relationship is the subject of a settlement and the latter is not novative in nature, the non-extinction of the original relationship arising from that character of the settlement does not mean that the parties’ position is governed simultaneously by the original agreement and the settlement agreement, but only that the eventual termination of the latter revives the original agreement. Consequently, disputes relating to the settlement agreement are not devolved to the arbitral jurisdiction established by the original agreement.
• Court of Florence, 15 September 2023, no. 2622
  The presence of an arbitration clause does not prevent the plaintiff from requesting and obtaining from the ordinary courts an injunction for the claim arising out of the agreement, without prejudice to the plaintiff’s right to object to the arbitration jurisdiction in the context of opposition, with the consequent need for the latter judge to revoke the injunction and send the parties to the sole arbitrator or to the arbitration board.
• Court of Santa Maria Capua Vetere, 11 September 2023, no. 3277
  In an international contract between companies, Article 1341 of the Italian Civil Code, which requires the specific written approval of the arbitration clause, does not apply.
• Court of Venice, 6 September 2023, no. 1515
  The arbitration clause contained in a particular contract does not extend its effects to disputes relating to another contract, even if related to the allegedly main one.
• Court of Bergamo, 8 September 2023, no. 1816
  The invalidity or even the termination of the contract in the contractual terms of which the arbitration clause is inserted does not affect the validity and effectiveness of the latter for the decision of disputes arising from the performance of that contract, since the arbitration clause is not an accessory of the contract in which it is inserted, but has its own individuality and autonomy clearly distinct from that of the contract to which it is attached.
• Court of Milan, 8 September 2023, no. 6961
  The validity of an arbitration clause must be assessed independently of the contract to which it relates.
• Court of Cosenza, 8 September 2023, no. 1432
  The presence of an arbitration clause does not prevent the creditor in the abstract from requesting and obtaining from the ordinary courts an injunction for the claim arising from the contract, without prejudice to the right of the defendant to object to the arbitral jurisdiction in the opposition, with the consequent need for the latter judge to revoke the injunction and send the parties to the sole arbitrator or to the arbitration board.
• Court of Rome, 13 September 2023, no. 12954
  Disputes concerning the interpretation of internal by-laws and the relationship between the shareholders and the company may be referred to arbitrators on an informal basis and may be settled in equity.
• Court of Turin, 21 September 2023, no. 3611
  The dispute between the company and its alleged hidden shareholder, in the presence of a statutory arbitration clause, is devolved to the jurisdiction of the arbitrators.
• Court of Turin, 21 September 2023, no. 3616
  A dispute concerning the dissolution of a partnership is not arbitrable.
• Court of Cuneo, 22 September 2023, No. 664
  Pursuant to consumer law, an arbitration clause included in a contract between a consumer and a professional is presumed to be vexatious, as it establishes a derogation from the jurisdiction of the judicial authority.
• Court of Rovigo, 22 September 2023, no. 803
  Corporate disputes that have as their object the interests of the company or that concern violations of rules set up to protect the collective interest of shareholders or third parties cannot be subject to compromise. The area of unavailability must be considered limited to those interests protected by mandatory rules, the violation of which determines a reaction of the system free from any party initiative, such as the rules aimed at guaranteeing the clarity and accuracy of financial statements.
• Court of Venice, ord. 26 September 2023
  On the subject of corporate arbitration promoted following the reform pursuant to Legislative Decree 149/2022, the state court must be deemed to have jurisdiction over a petition filed the day after the application for arbitration was filed, at a time when the arbitral tribunal has not yet been constituted, also in light of the reasons of urgency put forward by the appellant to request the adoption of a precautionary measure in a timely manner.
• Court of Bari, 27 September 2023, no. 3728
  The plea of informal arbitration cannot be equated with a procedural plea relating to questions of jurisdiction or competence, but constitutes a preliminary plea on the merits, since by means of an informal arbitration clause the parties agree to a prior waiver of jurisdiction in favour of a negotiated settlement of any future disputes, the plea of arbitration being underlying the issue of substantive law concerning the validity and interpretation of the arbitration agreement or clause.
• Court of Milan, 28 September 2023, no. 7378
  The arbitral judge is also competent to rule on the costs of the proceedings conducted before the state court that has declared itself incompetent.
• Court of Trani, 2 October 2023, no. 1449
  Unless the parties have expressly circumscribed its effectiveness to certain disputes, all disputes that find their matrix in the contract, and therefore all disputes relating to the existence, validity, termination, execution of the contract, even if arising after the exhaustion of the contractual relationship between the parties as long as they relate to situations constituted by the contract, shall be deemed to be referred to arbitration by virtue of the clause.
• Court of Agrigento, 3 October 2023, no. 1319
  The arbitral award has, from the date of its last signature, the effects of the judgement pronounced by the judicial authority; nevertheless, it acquires enforceability only with the presidential decree of homologation.
• Court of Potenza, 3 October 2023, no. 1234
  Measures that, pursuant to Article 279 of the Code of Civil Procedure, contain a ruling of a decisional nature (on jurisdiction, competence, or on preliminary issues of the trial or preliminary issues on the merits), even when they do not define the judgement, even if qualified as an order, are to be considered non-final judgements. It follows that where such a ruling has rejected an objection of compromise it cannot be, even implicitly, revoked or modified by the (final) judgment, since the splitting of the decision entails the exhaustion of the jurisdictional power for the part of the dispute decided by the interlocutory judgment, even if it is in the form of an order.
• Court of Palermo, 4 October 2023, no. 4311
  Since the referral of a dispute to the arbitrators entails a departure from ordinary jurisdiction, in case of doubt as to the interpretation of the scope of the arbitration clause, a restrictive interpretation of it and affirmative of state jurisdiction must be preferred, recognising that the disputed claim does not fall within the scope of the matter referred to the arbitrators [per incuriam].
• Court of Benevento, 5 October 2023, no. 1975
  The inclusion of an arbitration clause in a consortium statute requires the approval of all consortium members pursuant to Article 2607 of the Italian Civil Code.
• Court of Bologna, 5 October 2023, No. 1959
  In the presence of an arbitration clause in the Articles of Association, which devolves disputes against the directors to the jurisdiction of an arbitration court, the latter is also competent for liability actions brought pursuant to Article 146 of the Bankruptcy Law, with the clarification that only the corporate liability action is attributed to the arbitration court’s competence, whereas the action pertaining to the company’s creditors is the competence of the state court.
• Court of Teramo, 5 October 2023, No. 910
  The existence of an arbitration clause does not exclude the jurisdiction of the ordinary judge to issue an injunction decree, given that the discipline of arbitration proceedings does not contemplate the issuance of measures inaudita altera parte, but requires the latter, in the event of a subsequent objection based on the existence of such clause, to declare the nullity of the opposed decree and the simultaneous submission of the dispute to the judgment of the arbitrators.
• Court of Naples, 9 October 2023, no. 9091
  The reference, contained in a contract, to the rules of arbitral jurisdiction set forth in a separate document must be made by an express and specific reference to the arbitration clause and not, instead, in a generic manner, by mere reference to the document or form containing the clause itself, since only the express reference ensures the full awareness of the parties as to the waiver of jurisdiction.
• Court of Monza, 12 October 2023, no. 2195
  Jurisdiction, including arbitral jurisdiction, is determined on the basis of the plaintiff’s claim and the facts underlying it, while the defendant’s exceptions can only assume the role of a residual source of conviction not of dialectical opposition to the presentation of the claim itself.
• Court of Milan, 16 October 2023, no. 8054
  It constitutes procedural behaviour contrary to the basic principles of good faith and fundamentally not deserving of protection that of the assigned debtor who, summoned by the assignee in proceedings before the ordinary courts, has objected to the lack of jurisdiction of the latter due to the presence of an arbitration clause in the contract from which the claim arose, only to complain, once the case has been brought before the arbitrators, that the latter lack jurisdiction because the assignee is not party to the said clause.
• Court of Vasto, 18 October 2023, no. 324 
  Pursuant to Article 34, co. 2, Legislative Decree No. 5 of January 17, 2003, the arbitration clause referring corporate disputes to arbitrators must in all cases, under penalty of nullity, confer the power to appoint all arbitrators to a person outside the company.
• Court of Venice, 19 October 2023, no. 1830
  The loan granted by the shareholder to the company is inevitably inherent to corporate relations, so that the cognition of disputes relating to the same is devolved to arbitrators, in the presence of a statutory arbitration clause.
• Court of Cosenza, 24 October 2023, no. 1740
  Article 819-ter of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure subjects the objection of arbitration to the same regime provided for the objection of lack of jurisdiction, stating that it must be raised, under penalty of forfeiture, in the statement of defence and specifying that failure to raise the objection excludes the arbitral jurisdiction limited to the dispute decided in that case; the lack of a specific indication as to the term within which the objection must be raised requires reference to be made to the general rules dictated by article 38 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, which states that lack of jurisdiction, as much for the subject matter as for the value or territory, must be raised, under penalty of forfeiture, in the statement of defence, which provides that a plea of lack of jurisdiction, whether by subject-matter, by value or by territory, must be raised, under penalty of lapse of time, in the response filed in due time.
• Court of Milan, 24 October 2023, no. 8277
  Considering the equivalence of the effects of the arbitral award with those of the judgement pronounced by the judicial authority provided for by Article 824-bis of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, the rules of jurisprudence on lis pendens between identical cases pending at different levels of judgement, inspired by the principle of ne bis in idem, shall apply.
• Court of Taranto, 24 October 2023, no. 2514
  Where there is an arbitration clause in the contract with reference to certain specifically identified disputes, and a different choice of court clause, arbitration jurisdiction shall be deemed to exist only with reference to the specific disputes indicated in the arbitration clause.
• Court of Florence, 30 October 2023, no. 3129
  The action for the repayment of the remuneration paid to the director of a company in the absence of a shareholders’ resolution falls within the jurisdiction of arbitration where the by-laws contain an arbitration clause also relating to disputes between the company and the directors.
• Court of Latina, 30 October 2023, No. 2303
  The arbitration clause contained in the deed of trust does not apply in the action for revocation under Article 2901 of the Italian Civil Code.
• Court of Naples, 31 October 2023, no. 9964
  The arbitration agreement contained in a company’s articles of association does not apply in the event of a challenge to the shareholders’ meeting resolutions brought by a third party pursuant to Articles 2379 and 2479-ter of the Italian Civil Code.
• Court of Pisa, 7 November 2023, no. 1385
  The arbitration clause contained in the tender contract entrenches arbitral jurisdiction also with regard to disputes over non-contractual works, since these are works that nonetheless derive their title from the same source of negotiation and in view of the parties’ intention to refer all disputes relating to the performance and interpretation of the tender contract to arbitrators.
• Court of Spoleto, 7 November 2023, No 829
  In the case of opposition to an injunction based on the existence of an arbitration clause, the opposing judge must declare the lack of jurisdiction of the judge who issued the decree and order the submission of the dispute to the arbitrators (in the case of ritual arbitration) or declare the inadmissibility of the request (in the case of irritual arbitration) and in any case declare the nullity of the opposed decree.
• Court of Vallo della Lucania, 7 November 2023, no. 924
  The use in the context of an arbitration clause of the modal verb regent “potere” is not valid to infer the mere optionality, and therefore the non-compulsoriness, of arbitration as a means of settling future disputes between the parties.
• Court of Venice, 10 November 2023, no. 2008
  The plea of informal arbitration cannot be equated with a procedural plea relating to questions of jurisdiction or competence, but constitutes a preliminary plea on the merits, since by means of an informal arbitration clause the parties agree to a prior waiver of jurisdiction in favour of a negotiated settlement of any future disputes, the plea of arbitration being underlying the issue of substantive law concerning the validity and interpretation of the arbitration agreement or clause.
• Court of Catanzaro, 13 November 2023, no. 1876
  The provision of Article 817(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure must be interpreted to mean that once arbitration has commenced, only the arbitrators have the power to decide on their own jurisdiction. The decision of the State Judge that, having taken note of the pending arbitration dispute, declares the lis pendens and orders the removal of the case from the register is incapable of producing the effects of res judicata and therefore does not preclude the resumption of the case, before the same State Judge, if the arbitrators declare themselves to have no jurisdiction.
• Court of Milan, 13 November 2023, no. 8924
  Notwithstanding the assimilation of the objection of compromise to the objection of lack of jurisdiction, there is no room for the application of art. 38, para. 2 of the Code of Civil Proceedings with regard to the lack of power of the judge to decide on the costs in the event of the other party’s adherence to the objection, given that in proceedings for opposition to an injunction the jurisdiction conferred by art. 645 of the Code of Civil Procedure to the judicial office to which the judge who issued the decree belongs has a functional and mandatory character and the judgment revoking the injunction defines the opposition proceedings that are not transferred to the arbitrator.
• Court of Vicenza, 15 November 2023, no. 2261
  For the purposes of declaring invalid the award issued at the conclusion of the informal arbitration, the relevance of the error of law that the arbitrators may have committed must be excluded, since the appeal may be based only on the essential and recognisable error of fact, understood as an altered perception or false representation of the factual elements submitted to the arbitrators’ examination, and not on the erroneous assessment of a correctly perceived reality (so-called error of judgement).
• Court of Florence, 16 November 2023, No. 3345
  While the ordinary judge always has jurisdiction to issue an injunction notwithstanding the existence of an arbitration clause in the contract from which the creditor relationship at issue originates (and this because the rules of arbitration proceedings do not provide for the pronouncement of measures of a monitoring nature), on the other hand when an objection to an injunction has been filed, normal cognitive proceedings are commenced and, if the debtor objects to the arbitral jurisdiction, the conditions laid down in the arbitration agreement are fulfilled and, consequently, the jurisdiction of the ordinary court previously seised, which must revoke the injunction and refer the parties to the arbitrators, ceases.