Abstract
This text explores the recent discussion in The Czech Republic and Slovakia that took place between 2010-2012, concerning the question of application of legal naturalism and legal positivism in legal practice. The main arguments of the discussion are summarized.
For legal naturalists, the virtuous values are the concept that should always prevail over the strict language-based interpretation of law. Legal positivists however pound at this theory's weak point when they rightfully question the ability to specifically formulate these values in an exact and consistent way.
After more than ten years, we revisit this discussion to pay homage to two of its original contributors, Pavel Höllander and Alexandr Bröstl. For this reason, we continue to the discussion by looking at the changes to the framework of the discussion within recent years.
Two main concepts that have been a subject of change are explored. That being the rise of legal formalism and worsening of legislative inflation.
The chapter ends by presenting the counterarguments and limitations to the presented arguments.