Argumentative constitutional triallism of norms in reelational technique

The article under studies deals with the peculiarities of argumentative triallism of norms (the division of the so-called fundamental legal norms into law-justifying and two types of law-negating norms in classical, standard, and derivative relational technique) in the process of functioning of relational technique, within written and oral litigation, as well as within the formation of an expertise style of processing a legal case. The possibility of applying argumentative normotrialism within the framework of constitutional norm-making is indicated. The article assumes that in classical relational technique, argumentative triallism of norms might rely on the action-legal thinking, which suggests the division of legal means into claims and objections, the latter generally being classified as absolute and relative ones. It is important that within standard relational technique (also known as the technique of H. Daubenspeck and his disciples), argumentative triallism of norms could have been related to the formation of pandect law in the XIX century, namely, to the textbook on pandect law by B. Windscheid. The latter may be regarded as the founder of argumentative triallism of norms in the modern sense. In any case, standard relational technique rests on the idea of argumentative triallism of norms from the very beginning and up to this day, especially when it comes to an expertise opinion (votum) or, as it is now commonly said, a working technique. Particular emphasis has been laid on the fact that argumentative triallism of norms is of great importance in derivative relational technique. In the expertise style of processing a legal case, it performs a pure function of a plan for elaborating an expertise opinion, which is a simplified version of an expertise opinion (votum) and is based on standard relational technique. The point is that an expertise opinion in derivative relational technique is consistently drawn up as follows: first, the law-justifying norms are analyzed, then - absolute law-negating rules, ...