Many of the failures and deficiencies of software projects can be attributed to the lack of effort exerted in addressing requirements in the early planning stages of software development. In multiple stakeholder development environments, requirements will inevitably come into conflict, therefore, it is important to address these conflicts early in software development. The research presented in this thesis surveyed several existing models that resolve requirements conflicts. The goal of the research was to investigate the suitability of these models in identifying, visualizing and solving requirements conflicts. To achieve this goal it was decided to apply these models in a context different than they were originally applied. The context of this research was a process where two stakeholder groups negotiated the requirements of the particular software system. The application of the models was done as a case study. Three models were studied, namely the Utility Curves Model, the Win-Win Model and the \textit{\textbf{i*}} Framework. It was found that each model contributes uniquely to conflict resolution. We have documented strength and limitations for each model and have concluded that these three models should be used together in tandem. A hybrid model was constructed that was composed of the three models. The hybrid model leverages the strengths and addresses the limitations of the three individual models.