NO GUIDELINES CONCERNING CROSSCULTURAL STUDIES OF CHILDREN'S COURTS EXIST, AND THREE ASPECTS OF COMPARATIVE RESEARCH ARE FREQUENTLY NEGLECTED. FIRST, TYPOLOGIES OF CHILDREN'S TRIBUNALS WHICH TAKE THE INTERNATIONAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE LEGAL SYSTEMS INTO ACCOUNT ARE STILL LACKING. IN THIS RESPECT, A STUDY OF THE FUNCTIONING OF CHILDREN'S COURTS REVEALS TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF COMMUNICATION: IN THE VERTICAL NETWORK OF COMMUNICATION, DISCUSSION AND EXCHANGE OF IDEAS GOES ON BETWEEN PERSONS AT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS (E.G., BETWEEN JUDGE, PROBATION OFFICER, AND POLICE OFFICER) WHILE IN THE HORIZONTAL TYPE, INFORMATION IS SHARED WITHIN A SINGLE ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT (E.G., AMONG PROBATION OFFICERS) BUT NOT BETWEEN ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS. ALTHOUGH THIS TYPOLOGY HELD TRUE FOR CHILDREN'S COURTS IN PARIS, VIENNA, BOSTON, EDMONTON, AND MONTREAL, METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS CONTINUE TO EXIST. FOR INSTANCE, THE TYPOLOGY DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR REGIONAL OR INDIVIDUAL COURT VARIATIONS WITHIN A PARTICULAR COUNTRY. SECOND, A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE TRADITIONAL ROLES OF THE COURT PERSONNEL (E.G., OF THE JUDGE OR THE PROSECUTOR) LEADS TO ERRONEOUS RESULTS SINCE THESE ROLES DO NOT CORRESPOND TO EACH OTHER WITHIN DIFFERENT SYSTEMS. A MORE PROMISING APPROACH COMPARING THE FUNCTIONS OF COURT PERSONNEL INDICATES THAT THE PROSECUTOR OF THE CROWN IN VANCOVER FULFILLS MUCH THE SAME FUNCTION OF PRESENTING THE CASE AS THE JUDGE DOES IN PARIS. THIRD, LESSER MEMBERS OF THE COURTS WHO CARRY ON IMPORTANT INFORMAL CONTACTS WITH THE CLIENTS AND THUS FULFILL A VITAL FUNCTION WITHIN THE COMPLEX SYSTEM ARE FREQUENTLY IGNORED. THESE FUNCTIONS WERE FOUND TO BE CARRIED OUT IN THE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES BY BAILIFFS, COURT CLERKS, OR RECEPTIONISTS. THE ARTICLE CONTAINS A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY. --IN FRENCH. (SAJ)