header-logo header-logo

14 August 2013 / Erika Rackley , Erika Rackley
Issue: 7573 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

The Neuberger Experiment

manwoman

Do female judges change the substance of decision-making, asks Erika Rackley

Is it possible to isolate the potential impact of gender, as distinct from any other identity characteristic, in any given judgment?

While few would argue against the importance of a diverse judiciary, the view that the inclusion of different perspectives on the bench would alter—let alone enrich—the substance and quality of judicial decision-making, remains controversial.

One reason for this is that there have been doubts as to how, if at all, the identity characteristics of any given judge affect how they judge, and still less whether any potential differences can be correlated and corroborated across gender, ethnicity, etc. Even if we are agreed that, on balance, it is likely that gender makes some difference to judicial decision-making, we might think that until we can demonstrate how women and men differ in their judging, arguments for increasing diversity on this basis cannot get off the ground. But how might we prove this?

The Neuberger Experiment

In May 2013, BBC Radio 4’s

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll