The debate on judicial discretion and its limits gained considerable attention from legal theorists in the 1930’s. One of the reasons accounting for this increase in interest was the loss of influence of certain maxims of theoretical positivism as a way of describing the structural characteristics of legal orders1. Some currents of thought such as American legal realism challenged completeness and the formalist perception of the role of judges as simply implementing the will of the legislation2. Extreme realism, which presents legal theory as a mere psychological theory of adjudication, did not have a lasting influence. However, it did trigger an interest to analyse judicial decision-making and its connection to normative production. Particularly in the 1970’s, intense debate arose about the problem of adjudication of norms. Controversy focused on two main issues: the technical necessity for judicial discretion on the one hand, and the justification of discretionary decisions on the other.