Email this article 
On the Applicability of Legal-Dogmatic Methods to Resolving Conflicts of Principles
- Authors: Kraevsky A.A.1,2
-
Affiliations:
- St. Petersburg State University
- Samara State Economic University
- Issue: No 10 (2025)
- Pages: 17-27
- Section: Public law (state law) studies
- URL: https://bakhtiniada.ru/2072-909X/article/view/361346
- ID: 361346
Cite item
Open Access
Access granted
Abstract
In modern legal science, a gap has formed between the traditional dogmatic method of conflict resolution, used in resolving most normative conflicts and the concept of weighing or balancing legal principles, which has become widespread in the theory of constitutional law. The problem lies in the lack of clarity of the correlation between the two methods and the boundaries of their application.
The aim of the study is to overcome the methodological gap between the traditional method of resolving normative conflicts and the method of weighing, placing the theory of clash of principles within the framework of the general theory of normative conflicts.
The main methods used in the paper are the general scientific methods of deduction, analysis, synthesis, abstraction, determination and comparison. The general scientific method of measurement is also discussed to formulate a general conclusion.
The article compares the traditional method of resolving normative conflicts based on conflict rules and harmonization of the content of colliding norms, the method of categorization (another method of resolving conflicts of principles identified in the scientific literature) and the method of weighing principles. There are two versions of the latter. The first one considers “weighing” as a strict and mathematically precise measurement procedure, and the second one considers “weighting” as a certain metaphor that cannot be strictly formalized. Using the example of the famous R. Alexy’s weight formula, the main problem of the strict concept of weighing – Incommensurability of the compared principles in the scientific sense – Is shown, and the main counterarguments of the proponents of this approach are critically analyzed. The non-strict concept of weighing, along with categorization, are included in the general framework of the traditional method of conflict resolution as elements of interpretive harmonization of conflicting norms.
Full Text
About the authors
Arseny A. Kraevsky
St. Petersburg State University; Samara State Economic University
Author for correspondence.
Email: a.krajewski@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6112-7417
Candidate of Science (Law), Associate Professor at the Theory and History of State and Law Department of St. Petersburg State University; Visiting Researcher at the Samara State University of Economics
Russian Federation, St. Petersburg; SamaraReferences
- Vlasenko, N. A. Collision norms in Soviet law. Irkutsk: Irkutsk University Press; 1984. 99 p. (In Russ.)
- Gambaryan, A. S., Dallakyan, L. G. Collision norms and their competition. Monograph. Moscow: Yurlitinform; 2019. 160 p. (In Russ.)
- Petrov, A. A., Shafirov, V. M. The subject hierarchy of statutes. Moscow: Prospekt; 2014. 208 p. (In Russ.)
- Alexy, R. Weight formula. Russian yearbook of legal theory. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University Press; 2011. № 3-2010. Pp. 208–228. (In Russ.)
- Belov, S. A. Jurisprudence of constitutional values: origin, criticism and defense against it. Lomonosov Law Journal. 2024;(2):3-31. (In Russ.)
- Varlamova, N. V. Interpretation of the human rights legal acts: enevitability of judicial discretion. In: E. N. Tonkov, I. L. Chestnov, eds. Interpretation of law: Classics and Postclassics. Collective monograph. St. Petersburg: Aletejya; 2024. Pp. 269–284. (In Russ.)
- Varlamova, N. V. Human rights: theoretical foundation and legal-dogmatic concretization. Monograph. Moscow: Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences; 2024. 624 p. (In Russ.)
- Dworkin, R. Taking rights seriously. Transl. from Engl., ed. by L. B. Makeeva. Moscow: ROSSPEN; 2004. 391 p. (In Russ.)
- Koval, S. V. About Dworkin seriously. Modern Anglo-American philosophy of law. Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics; 2024. 392 p. (In Russ.)
- Kasatkin, S. N. Borders of the Empire: Ronald Dworkin’s legal interpretativism on the map of legal theories. Monograph. Samara: Samara Law Institute of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia; 2021. 115 p. (In Russ.)
- Timoshina, E. V., Vasileva, N. S., Kondurov, V. E., et al. Three realms of law: validity, efficacy, legitimacy. Ed. E. V. Timoshina. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg University; 2023. 644 p. (In Russ.)
- Kornev, V. N. The evolution of the doctrine principles of law in Russian legal science. Yuridicheskaya nauka i praktika: Vestnik Nizhegorodskoj akademii MVD Rossii = Legal Science and Practice: Journal of Nizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. 2018;(1):64-70. (In Russ.)
- Alexy, R. A Theory of constitutional rights. Transl. from Germ. by J. Rivers. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010. 462 p.
- Esser, J. Grundsatz und Norm in der richterlichen Fortbildung des Privatrechts: rechtsvergleihende Beiträge zur Rechtsquellen und Interpretationlehre. 4. Aufl. Tübingen: Mohr; 1990. 394 S.
- Kornev, V. N. The principles of law in international legal doctrine: the nature, purpose and functions. Gosudarstvo i pravo = State and Law. 2016;(11):59-67. (In Russ.)
- Dworkin, R. Taking rights seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1978. 371 p.
- Hart, H. L. A. The concept of law. Eds. P. L. Bulloch, J. Raz. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. 333 р.
- Raz, J. Legal Principles and the limits of law. Yale Law Journal. 1972;81(5):823-854.
- Kasatkin, S. N. Conceptualization of legal collisions: some theoretical and methodological distinctions. Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser.: Pravo = Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Law. 2025;(1):52-60. (In Russ.).
- Kraevsky, A. A. Between holism and realism: H. Kelsen’s two theories of legal conflicts. RUDN Journal of Law. 2025;(1):117-134. (In Russ.)
- Kelsen, H. Essays in legal and moral philosophy. Transl. from Engl. and Germ. by M. V. Antonov, A. A. Kraevsky. St. Petersburg: Alef-Press; 2024. 291 p. (In Russ.)
- Kelsen, H. Legal theory of convention. Transl. from French by D. V. Danilenko; ed. D. O. Grachev. Pravo i politika = Law and Politics. 2009;(2):256-264. (In Russ.)
- Dolzhikov, A. V. The constitutional principle of proportionality: a legal-dogmatic method. Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2021;(53):540-561. (In Russ.)
- Vaskovsky, E. V. Civil law methodology. The theory of interpretation and application of civil laws. Moscow: YurInfoR; 2002. 508 p. (In Russ.)
- Cueto-Rua, J. Judicial methods of interpretation of the law. Baton Rauge: Louisiana State Univ. Law; 1981. 508 p.
- Barak, A. Proportionality, constitutional rights and their limitations. Transl. from Hebrew by D. Kalir. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012. 611 p.
- Koen-Eliya, M., Porat, I. American balancing and German proportionality: the historical origins. Transl. from Engl. by D. Sichinava. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie = Comparative Constitutional Review. 2011;(3):59-81. (In Russ.)
- Shustrov, D. G. Principle of proportionality in Israeli constitutional law. Moscow: Lenand; 2015. 160 p. (In Russ.)
- Belov, S. A. Rationality of judicial balancing constitutional values using a proportionality test. Peterburgskij jurist = Petersburg Lawyer. 2016;(1):63-75. (In Russ.)
- Carnap, R. Philosophical foundations of physics. Transl. from Engl. by G. I. Ruzavin; ed. I. B. Novik. Moscow: Progress; 1971. 390 p. (In Russ.)
- Cohen, M., Nagel, E. An introduction to the logic and scientific method. Transl. by P. S. Kuslij. Chelya¬binsk: Sotsium; 2010. 655 p. (In Russ.)
- Da Silva, V. A. Comparing the incommensurable: constitutional principles, balancing and rational decision. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 2011;31(2);273-301.
- Klatt, M., Meister, M. The constitutional structure of proportionality. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. 184 p.
- Manzhosov, S. A. Reasoning by precedent in terms of balancing. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie = Comparative Constitutional Review. 2019;(6):61-85. (In Russ.)
- Hart, H. L. A. The concept of law. Transl. from Engl. by E. V. Afosin, M. V. Babak, A. B. Didikin, S. V. Moiseev. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg University; 2007. 302 p. (In Russ.)
- Alexy, R. The concept and the validity of law (a reply to legal positivism). Transl. from Germ. by A. N. Laptev with the participation of F. Kalshoyer. Moscow; Berlin: Infotropik Media; 2011. 192 p. (In Russ.)
- Chapman, B. Incommensurability, proportionality, and defeasibility. Law, Probability and Risk. 2013;(12):259-274.
- Alexy, R. On the structure of legal principles. Transl. from Germ. by V. N. Kornev. Rossijskoe pravosudie = Russian Justice. 2017;(3):19-34. (In Russ.)
Supplementary files
