Rackley, Erika (2009) 'Detailing judicial difference.', Feminist legal studies., 17 (1). pp. 11-26.
In January 2004 Baroness Brenda Hale became the first woman to sit on the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords. Five years on, she has brought to her judicial role a lightness of touch that belies her increasingly significant impact on the court’s jurisprudence. Early forecasts that she would be “just a bit different” from her male companions have proved prophetic. However such assessments have stemmed primarily from a focus on her decision-making on a case-by-case basis. But what of her jurisprudence as a whole? This paper considers arguments for a more sustained and coherent methodological approach to analyses of Baroness Hale’s (and other judges’) jurisprudence as a framework through which to better understand and explore the potential of judicial difference and to better inform current debates about increasing judicial diversity in England and Wales.
|Keywords:||Baroness Hale, Difference, Diversity, Judging.|
|Full text:||Full text not available from this repository.|
|Publisher Web site:||http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10691-009-9107-8|
|Record Created:||14 Jul 2011 10:05|
|Last Modified:||22 Jun 2012 16:31|
|Social bookmarking:||Export: EndNote, Zotero | BibTex|
|Usage statistics||Look up in GoogleScholar | Find in a UK Library|