Separate opinions as argumentative activity type

National and international systems of law differ in as far as they allow separate opinions to be published. In the Netherlands, for example, collegial courts speak with one voice. In the European Court of Human Rights, however, court members who disagree with the majority of the court may express their divergent views in a separate opinion. In this paper I will investigate institutional constraints that may affect the argumentation brought forward in separate opinions and I will set about defining separate opinions as a distinct argumentative activity type