Due to rising health care expenditures international comparisons of health care systems are recently gaining more importance. These benchmarks can provide interesting information for improving health care systems. Many of these comparisons implicitly assume that countries have a universal understanding of justice. But this assumption is rather questionable. With regard to the existing cultural differences in the understanding of justice the transferability of elements of health care systems is not always assured. A transfer usually requires a thorough examination of the judicial systems in each country. This article analyses the influence of different judicial systems applying to health care. In this context theories of justice by Rawls, Nozick and Confucius representing the possible understanding of justice in different cultures are described and analysed with regards to their influence on health care systems. The example of financing health care shows that the three theories of justice have very different consequences for designing health care systems especially concerning the role of governments.