Small Navigation Menu

Primary Menu

Analysing Judgments from a Feminist Perspective

Citation: Hunter, Rosemary (2015) Analysing Judgments from a Feminist Perspective. Legal Information Management, 15 (1). pp. 8-11. ISSN 1472-6696


Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0

This article, by Rosemary Hunter, is based on a presentation given at the national training day on Law, Gender and Sexuality: Sources and Methods in Socio-Legal Research in May 2014, jointly sponsored by the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, the Socio-Legal Studies Association and the British Library. She begins by describing the uses of judgments as sources within feminist research on judging, and then outlines three different methods of analysis employed within this research: quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis, and the newest method, that of rewriting judgments. Rosemary Hunter is Professor of Law and Socio-Legal Studies at Queen Mary, University of London, where she teaches family law, feminist jurisprudence and research methods. Her research focuses on family law processes, access to justice, and feminist judging. She was one of the organisers of the UK Feminist Judgments Project, and is the current chair of the Socio-Legal Studies Association.

Additional Information: This is a pre-print of an article which will be published in a special issue of Legal Information Management in 2015. It has been developed by the author (Professor Rosemary Hunter) from a paper she gave at “Law, Gender and Sexuality: sources and methods in socio-legal research” a national socio-legal training day held at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies on Monday 19 May 2014. The workshop was jointly organised by the British Library, the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies and the Socio-Legal Studies Association.
Creators: Hunter, Rosemary and
Official URL:
Related URLs:
Subjects: Law
Keywords: judgments, quantitative methods, qualitative methods, discourse analysis, content analysis, rewriting judgments, feminist judgment projects
Divisions: Institute of Advanced Legal Studies
  • March 2015 (published)


View details