Abstract
The Doctrine of Repugnancy, a fundamental basis for settling disputes between federal and state statutes, is the subject of this academic study. This study examines the breadth and applicability of this theory with a focus on Article 254 of the Constitution. It takes a look at situations where there are legal difficulties caused by apparent contradictions between federal and state legislation.
Within the context of Repugnancy, the article explores the possibility of competing interpretations. It investigates how courts handle such disputes and decide which law applies by looking at pertinent case studies. The study's overarching goal is to clarify how the Doctrine of Repugnancy upholds the separation of powers in the legislative branch while establishing a consistent body of law.
Keywords: Article 254, Doctrine of Repugnancy, Conflict of Law, Alternative Interpretation, National Law, State Law
