Concept and strategies for resolving conflicts between special legal rules
- Authors: Petrov A.A.1,2
-
Affiliations:
- Commercial court of Chelyabinsk region
- Samara State University of economics
- Issue: Vol 29, No 4 (2025)
- Pages: 899-913
- Section: CONFLICT OF LAWS
- URL: https://bakhtiniada.ru/2313-2337/article/view/363992
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2337-2025-29-4-899-913
- EDN: https://elibrary.ru/LHNICS
- ID: 363992
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
The paper presents ideas on resolving conflicts between special legal rules. Such norm conflicts occur when several special norms originate from a single general norm vased on different criteria. These are partial norm conflicts, which cannot be resolved directly through the legal maxim of lex specialis. The purpose of this article is to establish an optimal approach for resolving conflicts between special legal rules by analyzing current methodologies addressing such conflicts. The author employs various methods for investigating legal reality, including the systemic approach, conceptual analysis, legal-dogmatic method, comparative approach, and juridical hermeneutic. Five methods for addressing these conflicts are identified. (1) The ‘ostrich’ approach. This method avoids legal conflicts by narrowly interpreting one special rule as part of general rule, enabling direct application of lex specialis. (2) The ‘integrative’ approach: This method eliminates legal conflict by harmonizing the content of special rules through interpretation that aligns them with a common purpose. (3) The ‘essential’ approach: This approach resolves conflicts by identifying a parameter that determines the degree of specialty of colliding norms, then applying the lex specialis maxim accordingly. (4) The ‘meaningful’ approach: This involves describing a universal or localized meta-legal criterion to overcome conflicts, for example, applying the humanistic criterion that famous the norm most beneficial to its addressee (in favorem) in cases of a conflict. (5) The ‘dogmatic” criterion: This criterion resolves conflicts based on other general principles, such as the lex posterior maxim. Due to its neutrality and simplicity, this approach is recommended as the primary methor for resolving conflicts between special norms. If special rules are adopted simulteneously, the ‘essential’ criterion is the preferred method, with the ‘integrative’ approach as a possible alternative.
About the authors
Alexander A. Petrov
Commercial court of Chelyabinsk region; Samara State University of economics
Author for correspondence.
Email: sfu-pravo@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3177-8918
SPIN-code: 1429-9064
Candidate of Legal Sciences, Federal Judge, Arbitration Court of Chelyabinsk Region; Visiting Researcher, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education “Samara State University of Economics”
2 Vorovskogo Street, Chelyabinsk, 454091, Russian Federation; 141 Sovetskoy Armii Street, Samara, 443090, Russian FederationReferences
- Agashev, D.V. (2005) Legal conflicts in social security law. Tomsk, NTL Publ. (in Russian).
- Alenina, I.V. (2016) Collision Resolution within the Labor Law using a Principle of Priority of Legal Rules with the Larger Scope of Employee’s Rights and Guarantees. The Russian and foreign labor law. (1), 3-7. (in Russian). EDN: VOCKCF.
- Blagov, E.V. (2005) On conflict of special legal rules in criminal law. Jurisprudence. (2), 4-9. (in Russian). EDN: JYJKBV.
- Castermans, A. G. & de Graaff, R. (2018) The General concept of concurrence applied to European insolvency law. Civil Law Review. 18 (1), 268-292. (in Russian). EDN: YTETBR.
- Eremenko, A.S. (2011) Competition of civil standards in the mechanism of theory of civil relationships. Journal of the Udmurt State University: Law and Economics. (3), 109-114. (in Russian). EDN: OEYWJV.
- Gambaryan, A.S. & Dallakyan, L.G. (2019) The Conflict of Law Rules and Their Competition. Moscow, Justicinform Publ. (in Russian).
- Gorelik, A.S. (1998) Competition of Norms in Criminal Law. 2nd ed. Krasnoyarsk, KrasGU Publ. (in Russian).
- Inogamova-Hegai, L.V. (2015) Concept of Competition Between Legal Rules. Moscow, Norma Publ., Infra-M Publ. (in Russian).
- Kirpichev, A.E. (2019) Conflict of special rules in the law of obligations. Statute. (3), 138-145. (in Russian).
- Koskenniemi, M. (2004) Study on the function and scope of the lex specialis rule and the question of ‘self-contained regimes’. UN Doc ILC(LVI)/SG/FIL/CRD.1 and Add. 1. Available at: http://legal.un.org/ilc/sessions/55/pdfs/fragmentation_outline.pdf [Accessed 28th October 2024].
- Lindroos, A. (2005) Addressing norm conflicts in a fragmented legal system: The doctrine of lex specialis. Nordic Journal of International Law. 74 (1), 27-66. https://www.doi.org/10.1163/1571810054301022
- Michaels, R. & Pauwelyn, J. (2011-2012) Conflict of norms or conflict of laws? Different techniques in the fragmentation of public international law. Duke Journal Comparative & International law. (22), 349-376.
- Munzer, S.R. (1973) Validity and Legal Conflicts. Yale Law Journal. 82 (6), 1140-1174. https://doi.org/10.2307/795559
- Reshetnikova, I.V. (2013) Concept of summary procedure. Statute. (4), 93-98. (in Russian). EDN: PYZCNF.
- Reshetnikova, I.V. (ed.) (2018) The Practice of Application of Commercial Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. 5th ed. Moscow, Jurajt Publ. (in Russian).
- Ross, A. (1959) On Law and Justice. Berkeley, University of California Press Publ.
- Sardo, А. (2018) Let’s talk about antinomies. Normative systems reloaded. Revus. (36), 53-79. https://doi.org/10.4000/revus.4089
- Vlasenko, N.A. (1984) Conflict Resolving Norms in Soviet law. Irkutsk, Irkutsk University Publ. (in Russian).
- Vranes, E. (2005) Lex Superior, Lex Specialis, Lex Posterior. Zur Rechtsnatur der “Konfliktlösungsregeln”. Heidelberg Journal of International Law. (65), 391-405. (in German).
- Zacepin, A.M. (2014) Competition of civil standards in the mechanism of theory of civil relationships. The Law. Journal of HSE. (2), 84-100. (in Russian). EDN: SIIFXR.
Supplementary files
