Whenever evaluations are done, there are antinomies of interests both within and between stakeholders. To account for such antinomies, taxonomy has been developed which will be presented and discussed using the peer review processes in university evaluations as example. The taxonomy contains four dimensions: a) seven values domains are distinguished (ethical, methods, social and interactive, legal, economic, personal, and societal values); antinomies can be within or between domains; b) antinomies can be of the either-or-type (dichotomy; "alternative antinomy"), or they can be of the more-or-less type (more of one issue implies less of the other; "gradual antinomy"); c) there are antinomies on the goal dimension (different goals of the same or of different stakeholders are in antinomy, i.e., cannot be achieved simultaneously) and on the means dimension (although the goals are not in antinomy, the means to achieve them are incompatible), on both dimensions there can be alternative and gradual antinomies; d) a normative hierarchy for decision making in the case of antinomies is proposed and argued for. In evaluating higher education institutions with peer review, all types of antinomies can be found. Examples for such antinomies we have encountered in practical evaluations will be given, and a prototypical antinomy will be analyzed in detail: The peers are seen as stakeholders, and their interests and goals will be discussed (antinomies within one stakeholder). Applying the normative hierarchy can help to find a solution, yet it cannot replace the evaluators' personal decision. (Contains 2 tables.)