Judging in lower courts: Conventional, procedural, therapeutic and feminist approaches

Rosemary Hunter, Sharyn Roach Anleu, Kathleen Mack

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    9 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Recent theorising about feminist judging has concentrated on appellate courts and their judgments. This paper develops a conceptualisation of feminist judging in lower, first instance courts, which are dominated by high case volume and limited time for each matter, with decisions given orally and ex tempore rather than in elaborated written judgments. Through careful accounts of the philosophy, goals and practices of conventional as well as newer, more engaged approaches to judging, the paper compares and contrasts feminist judging with other approaches to judging in the lower courts. This entails considering dimensions such as the judicial officer's orientation to substantive law and practice in court, concepts of fairness, ethical commitments, the view of the defendant, and judicial qualities and capacities.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)337-360
    Number of pages24
    JournalInternational Journal of Law in Context
    Volume12
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2016

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Judging in lower courts: Conventional, procedural, therapeutic and feminist approaches'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this