The resolution of conflicts among legal rules or antinomies has a special relevance when judges interpretate the law. The purpose of this paper is to put into practice different criteria in order to avoid or the collisions among normative propositions. In particular, the analysis will be carried out on the basis of the recent case law of the Chilean Supreme Court on university financial credits enforcements and bankruptcy proceedings. In this way, we will seek to find discrepancies between the different chambers of the Chilean Court when ruling on cases involving the aforementioned procedures.