leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant

Where two statutes by the same legislature cannot stand together, the later one prevails and the earlier is impliedly repealed to the extent of the conflict. Courts lean against implied repeal: they first try to harmonise the two, and find repeal only where the provisions are so inconsistent that both cannot operate.

The maxim yields to another: a later general law does not repeal an earlier special law (generalia specialibus non derogant). Under the Indian Constitution, conflicts between Central and State laws on the Concurrent List are decided not by this maxim but by Article 254.

Example

Applying leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant, the court held the later provision on limitation to prevail over the inconsistent earlier one.

In Indian law

• Article 254, Constitution of India (repugnancy between Union and State laws)

See also

repeal · generalia specialibus non derogant · lex specialis derogat legi generali · harmonious construction

Read more in the study notes

• Harmonious construction (Interpretation of Statutes and Principles of Legislation)