This thesis conducts a theory comparison to determine which theory of social justice is best suited to address health inequalities. The theories used are the capability approach by Amartya Sen and Göran Therborn's theory on inequalities. Within the capability approach, two accounts specified on health capabilities will be regarded as well. These are the health capability approach by Ruger and the theory of health justice by Venkatapuram. The theory comparison is done by making use of a non-ideal theory framework, based on the theory by John Rawls and the critiques on it given by several authors, as well as the developments in the ideal/non-ideal theory debate. Non-ideal theory provides guidance towards reducing inequalities and enhancing justice and can therefore be useful for a theory on health inequalities. The developed non-ideal theory framework consists of five criteria to which the respective theories are compared to determine whether they fulfil the criteria. Comparing the theories to the framework will give an insight in which theory is best suited for reducing health inequalities. Therborn's theory on inequalities has proven to fulfil most of the criteria in the non-ideal theory framework and can therefore be regarded as best suited to reduce health inequalities.