The complexity of law is a recurring problem faced by government bodies, judges, lawyers, jurists and, in fact, all citizens confronted with legal issues. Ideally, the application of laws should be in line with the ideals of the society that formulates them. Whether this ideal is satisfied or not depends on many factors, among which the structure of the legal system, the quantity of its resources, or the competence of law interpreters. But it also depends on the form of the laws themselves. The equilibrium of law-writing consists in remaining intelligible while accounting for the great diversity of social situations subject to legislation. It must “find an optimal balance between rigorousness and flexibility, formality and understandability, that is, between expressing authority and yet being grounded in the everyday life of those affected by it” (Höfler / Piotrowski 2011). Problems induced by excessive complexity of law are well identified in legal literature (Epstein 1995; Kades 1996; Katz / Bommarito 2013; Palmirani / Cervone 2014). They have also been drawn to public attention. Complaints about “overlegislation”, meaning the rising quantity and complexity of law, have been formulated in recent years by national media in Switzerland, partially reflecting public opinion and the views of several politicians ( e.g. Zurlinden 2013-2015c).