According to the German spatial planning law, "Ziele" (specific aims) and "Grundsatze" (general principles) are being used as instruments of binding lower-level plans. Whereas Ziele govern with strict binding force, Grundsatze may be brought into balance with other aspects. In practice, however, legal issues have occurred when planners decided to modify the dualism of the spatial planning law regime, inserting intermediate forms of regulations into spatial plans. Subsequently, lawsuits have been decided by the courts, installing a test scheme to differ Ziele from Grundsatze. Following these decisions, questions have been raised if there actually is a test qualifying a norm as a strictly binding rule, leaving no room for interpretation, as opposed to a principle that may be balanced with other principles. The dissertation tries to put the specific issue into a broader perspective and suggests ways of coping efficiently with the more or less specific norms in the legal scheme.