Feminist Judgments

Rosemary Hunter is a Professor at the University of Kent. Clare McGlynn is a Professor at Durham University. Erika Rackley is a Senior Lecturer in Law at Durham University.

• Part I Introduction and Overview 1 Feminist Judgments: An Introduction Rosemary Hunter, Clare McGlynn and Erika Rackley 2 An Account of Feminist Judging Rosemary Hunter 3 The Art and Craft of Writing Judgments: Notes on the Feminist Judgments Project Erika Rackley Part II Parenting 4 Evans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd Commentary: Sally Sheldon Judgment: Sonia Harris-Short 5 Re N (A Child) Commentary: Emily Jackson Judgment: Samantha Ashenden 6 Re G (Children) (Residence: Same-Sex Partner) Commentary: Daniel Monk Judgment: Alison Diduck 7 Re L (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence) Commentary: Christine Piper Judgment: Felicity Kaganas 8 Re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) Commentary: Richard Huxtable Judgment: Geraldine Hastings Part III Property and Markets 9 Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2) Commentary: Alison Diduck Judgment: Rosemary Auchmuty 10 Porter v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis Commentary: Maureen O'Sullivan Judgment: Anna Grear 11 Baird Textile Holdings v Marks & Spencer Plc Commentary: John Wightman Judgment: Linda Mulcahy and Cathy Andrews Part IV Criminal Law and Evidence 12 R v A (No 2) Commentary: Louise Ellison Judgment: Clare McGlynn 13 R v Stone and Dobinson Commentary: Neil Cobb Judgment: Lois Bibbings 14 R v Brown Commentary: Matthew Weait and Rosemary Hunter Judgment: Robin Mackenzie 15 R v Dhaliwal Commentary: Mandy Burton Judgment: Vanessa Munro and Sangeeta Shah 16 R v Zoora (Ghulam) Shah Commentary: Susan Edwards Judgment: Samia Bano and Pragna Patel 17 Attorney-General for Jersey v Holley Commentary: Clare Connelly Judgment: Susan Edwards Part V Public Law 18 YL v Birmingham City Council and Others Commentary: Morag McDermont Judgment: Helen Carr and Caroline Hunter 19 R (Begum) v Governors of Denbigh High School Commentary: Holly Cullen Judgment: Maleiha Malik 20 Sheffield City Council v E Commentary: Jonathan Herring Judgment: Nicola Barker and Marie Fox 21 R v Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, ex parte Glass Commentary: Anne Morris Judgment: Jo Bridgeman Part VI Equality 22 Roberts v Hopwood Commentary: Stephanie Palmer Judgment: Harriet Samuels 23 Mundon v Del Monte Foods Ltd Commentary: Gwyneth Pitt Judgment: Rachel Horton and Grace James 24 James v Eastleigh Borough Council Commentary: Joanne Conaghan Judgment: Aileen McColgan 25 Wilkinson v Kitzinger Commentary: Karon Monaghan Judgment: Rosie Harding 26 EM (Lebanon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Commentary: Judy Walsh Judgment: Karon Monaghan

No sane person doubts that the law has been historically constructed by men and that gender equality in the law is an ongoing struggle. It's a mark, nevertheless of how well the struggle has been conducted that a series of workshops has now culminated in this highly original enterprise: a volume of leading judgments of the courts of England and Wales recast as a feminist judge might have written them. The Rt. Hon. Sir Stephen Sedley The Association of Women Barristers Website What's unique about Feminist Judgments is that it does not merely criticise self-proclaimed feminist judges for not being feminist enough. It actually provides the missing judgments that the authors think a feminist judge might have written in more than 20 leading cases from England and Wales. Crucially, the authors have attempted to write rulings based in the law at the times each case was heard. Joshua Rozenberg Law Society Gazette October 28th 2010 Within each of the chapters on the cases themselves, there is a commentary giving basic facts and important information to establish the foundations of the issues and to discuss why the case is significant. The commentary is extremely helpful, as no user is likely to be an expert in all the areas under consideration. Penetrating analysis, with a full, detailed but clear exposition that leaves few stones unturned. Penny Booth Times Higher Education 4 November 2010 To this editor's knowledge, no similar undertaking has been attempted. Even if there were a number of them, they would not likely compare favorably to this adept method of sensibly rewriting judicial history. American Society of International Law Newsletter January 2011