Abstract

As emphasized by Jeremy Bentham and the analytical school, logical consistency is a requirement for rational legislation. For understanding consistency between norms, a logical scrutiny of normative conflicts is needed. In our paper, a framework for the fine structure of such conflicts is introduced and explained. “Normative conflict” is defined relative the framework and different types of conflict distinguished. The framework consists of a formal language in which norms of a legal system can be represented, accompanied by a set of logical rules and general principles. These rules and principles are such that their application to sentences describing the contents of a legal system discloses conflicts within legal systems. Important elements in legislation are capacitative norms, relating to legal power, or “legal competence,” to achieve a valid legal result by an act–in–the–law. The analysis encompasses conflicts between deontic norms relating to obligations and permissions, on one hand, and norms relating to legal power, on the other. The analysis is applicable both to conflicts within a national legal system and to supranational normative conflicts, for example conflicts between national law and EU law