Feminist Judgments Family Law Opinions Rewritten

Reimagined court opinions that address iconic issues in family law from a feminist perspective with timely commentaries on those issues.

Fifty feminist law professors come together to rewrite twenty-five major Supreme Court opinions on gender justice and equality.

A feminist rewrite of tort law cases that reveals gender bias and the law's failure to redress serious harms to women.

Reimagines fundamental property law cases to demonstrate how a feminist lens could impact the law's development.

This book analyzes estates and trusts cases through a feminist lens using some of the most popular feminist legal theories.

An innovative collaboration between academics, practitioners, activists and artists, this timely and provocative book rewrites 16 significant Scots law cases, spanning a range of substantive topics, from a feminist perspective. Exposing power, politics and partiality, feminist judges provide alternative accounts that bring gender equity concerns to the fore, whilst remaining bound by the facts and legal authorities encountered by the original court. Paying particular attention to Scotland's distinctive national identity, fluctuating experiences of political sovereignty, and unique legal traditions and institutions, this book contributes in a distinctive register to the emerging dialogue amongst feminist judgment projects across the globe. Its judgments address concerns not only about gender equality, but also about the interplay between gender, class, national identity and citizenship in contemporary Scotland. The book also showcases unique contributions from leading artists which, provoked by the enterprise of feminist judging, or by individual cases, offer a visceral and affective engagement with the legal. The book will be of interest to academics, practitioners and students of Scots law, policy-makers, as well as to scholars of feminist and critical theory, and law and gender, internationally.

While feminist legal scholarship has thrived within universities and in some sectors of legal practice, it has yet to have much impact within the judiciary or on judicial thinking. Thus, while feminist legal scholarship has generated comprehensive critiques of existing legal doctrine, there has been little opportunity to test or apply feminist knowledge in practice, in decisions in individual cases. In this book, a group of feminist legal scholars put theory into practice in judgment form, by writing the 'missing' feminist judgments in key cases. The cases chosen are significant decisions in English law across a broad range of substantive areas. The cases originate from a variety of levels but are primarily opinions of the Court of Appeal or the House of Lords. In some instances they are written in a fictitious appeal, but in others they are written as an additional concurring or dissenting judgment in the original case, providing a powerful illustration of the way in which the case could have been decided differently, even at the time it was heard. Each case is accompanied by a commentary which renders the judgment accessible to a non-specialist audience. The commentary explains the original decision, its background and doctrinal significance, the issues it raises, and how the feminist judgment deals with them differently. The books also includes chapters examining the theoretical and conceptual issues raised by the process and practice of feminist judging, and by the judgments themselves, including the possibility of divergent feminist approaches to legal decision-making. From the foreword by Lady Hale 'Reading this book ought to be a chastening experience for any judge who believes himself or herself to be both true to their judicial oath and a neutral observer of the world... If lawyers and judges like me have so much to learn from reading this book, then surely other, more sceptical, lawyers and judges have even more to learn...other scholars, and not only feminists, must also be fascinated by the window it opens onto the process of judicial reasoning: not the straightforward, predetermined march from A to B of popular belief, but something altogether more complicated and uncertain. And anyone will find it a very good read.'

Feminist scholars rewrite major tax decisions in order to illustrate the key role of viewpoint in statutory interpretation.