法的违反情形与抵触情形之界分

法的违反情形与抵触情形是规范合法性审查的主要对象。前者是立法者制定的低阶法规定直接或间接不符合作为高阶法规定的立法性规定；后者是初显有效、内容同域、事项同类且适用条件重合的同阶法规定，因规定的内容、态度、语义或行为模式不兼容而导致其不能被共同实现。二者作为制度事实，都是应当被消除的立法不法情形。但二者是不同概念，法的违反情形由性质、内容和功能皆不同的高阶法与低阶法规定构成，违法的规定应当被判定为自始无效；法的抵触情形则是由相竞合的一般法规定构成，相抵触法规定中的不法一方应当被判定为嗣后无效。据此界分，规范合法性审查应当分成有效性审查与兼容性审查两个层面。
The violations of law and the collisions of law are the main objects of the legality review of legal norms. The violations of law refer to the states that the lower order legal prescriptions do not comply with the higher order legal prescriptions that function as a legislative regulations, which were caused in the process of legislation. The collisions of law refer to the incompatible states between the prima facie valid legal prescriptions with homogenous and overlapping content, which could appear in the domain of application of law. Both of them are sorts of institutional facts, and all of them should be eliminated from legal system as sorts of illicit prescriptions. However, there are substantial differences between them and can be discerned. The former states may only constructed by the lower order and higher order legal prescriptions, which are different in nature and contents. If the lower order legal prescriptions are identified that they are violating the higher order legal prescriptions in the process of review of validity, then they should be determined to be void ab initio. The latter states may only be formed by the legal prescriptions with homogeneous and overlapping contents. If legal prescriptions have been found that they are colliding with other prescriptions in the process of review of compatibility, then they should be judged to be invalid thereafter in accordance with the rule of application of law. According to the above view of points, the legality review of legal norms should be divided into two levels: one is the validity review of legal norms, the other is the compatibility review of legal norms.