indicated that courts should hesitate before " 'folio[wing]' " the judicial decisions issued by the intermediate appellate courts of sister Warsaw Convention signatories, such as those of Australia, where those nations' respective courts of last resort, such as the High Court of Australia, have yet to speak. That principle, however, does not apply to the instant appeal because we are not " 'follo[wing]’ ” the Court of Appeal’s decision in Georgeopoulos. Rath er, we have construed Article 17 in accordance with the ordinary canons of treaty interpretation and Georgeopoulos does no more than corroborate our understanding of that provision, further persuading us to adhere to a construction shared by our sister signatories. Cf. Tsui Yuan Tseng, 525 U.S. at 175-76 & n. 16, 119 S.Ct. 662 (<HOLDING>). 15 . In Morris, an unaccompanied minor
holding appellate courts must consider the trial courts jury charge as a whole holding that where both the appellate and trial courts are reviewing the paper record  there is no reason for the appellate courts to defer to the trial courts finding recognizing the concessions made by the signatories to reach an agreement recognizing courts duty to reconcile opinions from the georgia supreme court recognizing that the opinions issued by inter alia the intermediate appellate and trial courts of sister signatories corroborated the supreme courts understanding of article 17 and were therefore entitled to some degree of consideration