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

Abstract

Recent theorising about feminist judging has concentrated on appellate courts and their judgments. This article 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 article compares and contrasts feminist judging with other approaches to judging in the lower courts. This entails considering elements 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.