The essay analyzes the Constitutional Court case-law on a traditional regulation of Tyrol Region (so called "Maso chiuso"/"Erbhof"), aimed at preserving the indivisibility of the agricultural units in the mountain territory. In particular, recently the Court declared unconstitutional the preference given by law to males in mortis causa succession proceeding. The rule, already repealed by the reform of the autonomous province adopted in 2001, was applicable in the case. According to the author, case-law confirms the legal favor for a special regulation, corresponding to the needs of the territorial minority, protected by majority interference; it is also an example of the complexity of the relationship between "fact" and "law" in legal interpretation: the social feelings - which in this case would have pre-eminence over positive law, because of the protection of pluralism - corresponds to the principle of gender equality imposed by positive law, both at Constitutional, international and local levels.
Keywords: Pluralism, minorities, gender equality, constitutional court case-law, legal interpretation.