‘A Particular Disappointment?’ Judging Women and the High Court of Australia

Feminist Legal Studies 23 (3):273-294 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article examines whether the gender balance on the High Court of Australia has disrupted the gender regime. In so doing it considers the first lead judgments of the three women judges who sat concurrently on the High Court of Australia between 2009 and early 2015. The High Court has adopted an interesting informal practice of welcoming new judges whereby the newest member authors the lead judgment and their judicial colleagues offer a one-line concurrence. The way in which judicial authority is conferred in these judgments is reminiscent of the space in political spheres where an incumbent has their first opportunity to set out their identity and agenda in a speech free of the noise of dissent or debate; the ‘maiden’ speech. In that space the price an incumbent pays for comity is conformity. This article contends that the first judgment is a useful way of situating a discussion about women judges’ contributions vis-à-vis difference by querying the extent to which the woman judge can ever shake-off her status as the maiden bound to conform for the sake of comity.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,795

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Reporting Verbs in Court Judgments of the Common Law System: A Corpus-Based Study.Wei Yu - 2020 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 34 (2):525-560.
Gender, Judging and Job Satisfaction.Sharyn Roach Anleu & Kathy Mack - 2009 - Feminist Legal Studies 17 (1):79-99.
Judicial Reasoning in a Multinational Court.Bo Vesterdorf - 2019 - In Knut Almestad, Jean-Luc Baechler, Benedikt Bogason, Henrik Bull, Francis Delaporte, Luis José Diez Canseco Núñez, Peter Freeman, Vladimir Golitsyn, Irmgard Griss, Marc Jaeger, Koen Lenaerts, Paul Mahoney, Andreas Mundt, Sven Norberg, Toril Marie Øie, Þorgeir Örlygsson, Anne-José Paulsen, Georges Ravarani, Hubertus Schumacher, Vassilios Skouris, Gian-Flurin Steinegger, Sven Erik Svedman, Antonio Tizzano, Marc van der Woude, Bo Vesterdorf & Jean-Claude Wiwinius (eds.), The Art of Judicial Reasoning: Festschrift in Honour of Carl Baudenbacher. Cham: Springer Verlag. pp. 259-271.
Is it Easy to Remain Solely an Interpretator for a Court?Egidijus Baranauskas - 2009 - Jurisprudencija: Mokslo darbu žurnalas 116 (2):201-210.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-02-04

Downloads
25 (#889,993)

6 months
6 (#891,985)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

FLaK: Mixing Feminism, Legality and Knowledge.Ruth Fletcher - 2015 - Feminist Legal Studies 23 (3):241-252.

Add more citations