ABSTRACT
In this chapter we seek to advance understanding by comparing the major justificatory features of opinions of higher courts interpreting statutes in the various countries. We identify significant similarities and differences in the arguments, in patterns of justification, in modes of settling conflicts between arguments, and in the structure and style of these opinions as a whole. Increased understanding through comparison has practical value, and is worth pursuing for its own sake. Further, a reader interested in justificatory practices in the interpretation of statutes in any particular system can come to understand that system better by studying what it is not; that is, how it differs from the various systems treated here.
