The writing of a National Report in preparation for the World Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law involves a paradox. Contrary to what might legitimately be expected, a National Reporter is not asked to engage in any comparative analysis whatsoever. What, then, is the point of a National Report? The answer lies in what an elementary exegetical analysis would suggest: the National Reporter must present the national law on a given topic (or, more accurately, his perception of the national law, for we all know that there is no such thing as the national law). Traditionally, the boundaries of the reporting enterprise have remained confined within these parameters. It is thus left to a General Reporter appointed by the International Academy itself to make sense of the various National Reports on a given topic by bringing them together with a view to eliciting differences and similarities between the legal systems under consideration.