Impact of the Feminist Judgment Writing Projects
The Case of the Women’s Court of Canada
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-0993Keywords:
Feminist Judgment Projects, Women’s Court of Canada, Equality RightsAbstract
The first feminist judgment writing project, the Women's Court of Canada (WCC), published its initial set of judgments ten years ago in 2008. Although the WCC has led to feminist judgment projects in several other jurisdictions, research shows that the WCC judgments have not been cited very extensively by other academics, let alone by courts, tribunals or lawyers. This article explores whether this lack of citations is cause for concern, raises some possible explanations, and discusses strategies for giving feminist judgment projects broader and deeper impact.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads:
PDF 651
References
Appleby, G., and Dixon, R., eds., 2016. The Critical Judgments Project: Re-reading Monis v The Queen. Annandale, VA: Federation Press.
Appleby, G., and Naffine, N., 2015. Civility, gender and the law: critical reflections on the judgments in Monis v The Queen. Griffith Law Review [online], 24 (4), 616-639. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2015.1057918 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Auchmuty, R., 2012. Using Feminist Judgments in the Property Law Classroom. The Law Teacher [online], 46 (3), 227-238. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2012.732375 [Accessed 16 November 2018].
Baer, S., 2013. The Difference a Justice May Make: Remarks at the Symposium for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Columbia Journal of Gender & Law [online], 25 (1), 92-100. Available from: https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/873/ [Accessed 16 November 2018].
Baines, B., 2017. Women Judges and Constitutional Courts: Why Not Nine Women? In: H. Irving, ed, Constitutions and Gender. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 290-322.
Bakht, N., et al., 2007. Counting Outsiders: A Critical Exploration of Outsider Course Enrollment in Canadian Legal Education. Osgoode Hall Law Journal [online], 45 (4), 667-732. Available from: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol45/iss4/4/ [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Barker, N.J., and Lenon, S., 2016. Radically Rethinking Marriage. Oñati Socio-legal Series [online], 6 (6), 1193-1195. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2890956 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Bay, O., 2011. In the Matter of the Female Mind: An Analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada’s Approach to Women and Mental Health. Critical Disability Discourses / Discours critiques dans le champ du handicap [online], 3, 1-17. Available from: https://cdd.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/cdd/article/view/31553 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Beaudry, J., 2016. LAW 350C.001 – Issues of Equality and Social Justice. Allard School of Law, University of British Columbia.
Berger, L.L., Crawford, B.J., and Stanchi, K.M., 2017. Using Feminist Theory to Advance Equal Justice under Law. Nevada Law Journal [online], 17 (3), 539-548. Available from: http://scholars.law.unlvedu/facpub/1023 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Berger, L.L., Crawford, B.J., and Stanchi, K.M., 2018. Feminist Judging Matters: How Feminist Theory and Methods Affect the Process of Judgment. University of Baltimore Law Review [online], 47 (2), 167-197. Available from: https://scholars.law.unlvedu/facpub/1100 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Bernstein, A., 2015. The Feminist Jurisprudence of Judge Jack B. Weinstein. DePaul Law Review [online], 64 (2), 341-372. Available from: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol64/iss2/6 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Black, W.W., et al., 2011. Roundtable: Canada’s Human Rights System and the International Covenants. National Taiwan University Law Review, 6, 207-249.
Blizzard, T.A., 2014. Book Review: Gender and Judging. Hastings Women's Law Review [online], 25 (2), 267-304. Available from: http://repository.uchastings.edu/hwlj/vol25/iss2/7 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Bonthuys, E., 2015. Rh v De: A Feminist Minority Judgment on Adultery. South African Journal on Human Rights [online], 31 (2), 379-400. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/19962126.2015.11865252 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Bouclin, S., 2011. Judges, Women As. Encyclopedia of Women in Today's World [online]. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1866024 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Bouclin, S., and Sala, J.P., 2013. Une analyse de la réglementation des personnes itinérantes selon une perspective pothienne de la discrimination. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 25 (1), 1-30. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjwl.25.1.001 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Boyd, J., 2012. LAWS 3001 A – Women and the Legal Process. Ottawa: Carleton University.
Boyd, S.B., 2011. Spaces and Challenges: Feminism in Legal Academia. University of British Columbia Law Review [online], 44 (1), 205-220. Available from: https://commons.allard.ubc.ca/emeritus_pubs/3/ [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Boyd, S.B., and Parkes, D., 2017. Looking Back, Looking Forward: Feminist Legal Scholarship in SLS. Social and Legal Studies [online], 26 (6), 735-756. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0964663917724867 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Boyd, S.B., and Young, C.F.L., 2004. Feminism, Law, and Public Policy: Family Feuds and Taxing Times. Osgoode Hall Law Journal [online], 42 (4), 545-582. Available from: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol42/iss4/1 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Braley-Rattai, A., 2014. POLC68 – The Constitution of Canada and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. University of Toronto, Scarborough.
Brodsky, G., 2003. Gosselin v Quebec (Attorney General): Autonomy with a Vengeance. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 15, 194-214.
Brodsky, G., et al., 2006. Gosselin v Quebec (Attorney General) (Women’s Court of Canada). Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 18 (1), 189-249. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/230231 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Buckley, M., 2006. Symes v Canada (Women’s Court of Canada). Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 18 (1), 27-66. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/230233/summary [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Buckley, M., 2018. Reference re: Andrews v Law Society of British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 30 (2), 197-220. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/702305 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Carr, H., and Dearden, N., 2012. Research-led teaching, vehicular ideas and the Feminist Judgments Project. The Law Teacher [online], 46 (3), 268-280. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2012.737248 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Chan, E., 2014. Women trailblazers in the law: The New Zealand Women Judges Oral History Project. Victoria University of Wellington Law Review [online], 45 (3), 407–436. Available from: http://www.gwnz.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Chan-Women-Trailblazers-in-the-Law-1.pdf [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Cochran, P., 2007. Taking Notice: Judicial Notice and the Community Sense in Anti-Poverty Litigation. University of British Columbia Law Review [online], 40 (2), 559-590. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/1828/7674 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Cochran, P., 2017. Common Sense and Legal Judgment: Community Knowledge, Political Power, and Rhetorical Practice. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Cooper, D., 2016. Enacting counter-states through play. Contemporary Political Theory [online], 15 (4), 453-461. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-016-0015-9 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Crawford, B.J., and Infanti, A.C., eds., 2017. Feminist judgments. Rewritten Tax Opinions. Cambridge University Press.
Davies, M., 2011. Feminism and the Idea of Law. feminists@law [online], 1 (1). Available from: http://journals.kent.ac.uk/kent/index.php/feministsatlaw/article/view/9/66 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Davies, M., 2012. The Law Becomes Us: Rediscovering Judgment. Feminist Legal Studies [online], 20 (2), 167-181. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-012-9204-y [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Davies, M., 2014. Commentary on Dietrich v R. In: H. Douglas et al., eds, Australian Feminist Judgments: Righting and Rewriting Law. Oxford: Hart, 69-74.
Davies, M., 2016. Law’s truths and the truth about Law: Interdisciplinary refractions. In: M. Davies and V Munro, eds., The Ashgate Research Companion to Feminist Legal Theory. London: Routledge, 77-94.
Day, S., 2010. Canada’s Human Rights Institutions at Risk. Women's Court of Canada Blog.
Day, S., and Green, J., 2010. Bill C-31 is Sexist, Racist and Fatally Flawed. Rabble.ca [online], 26 April. First published on the Women’s Court of Canada Blog. Available from: http://www.rabble.ca/news/2010/04/bill-c-3-sexist-racist-and-fatally-flawed [Accessed 15 November 2018].
DeGreeve, J., et al., 2010. Diversity, Culture, and Contrasts: Canada’s Legal Kaleidoscope. Canadian Law Library Review, 35, 114-118.
Dickey Young, P., 2015. Sexuality and Religion in Alberta’s Bill 44. In: P. Dickey Young, H. Shipley and T.J. Trothen, eds., Religion and Sexuality: Diversity and the Limits of Tolerance. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Douglas, H., 2016. Sexual Violence, Domestic Abuse and the Feminist Judge. Journal of International & Comparative Law [online], 3, 317-343. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309552676_Sexual_Violence_Domestic_Abuse_and_the_Feminist_Judge [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Douglas, H., et al., eds, 2014. Australian Feminist Judgments: Righting and Rewriting Law. Oxford: Hart.
Eberts, M., 2009. Women as full citizens: addressing the barriers of gender and race in Canadian constitutional development. In: I. Sulkunen, S. Nevala-Nurmi and P. Markkola, eds., Suffrage, Gender and Citizenship: International Perspectives on Parliamentary Reform. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars, 377-414.
Eberts, M., McIvor, S., and Nahanee, T., 2006. Native Women’s Association of Canada v Canada (Women’s Court of Canada). Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 18 (1), 67-119. Available from: http://www.thecourt.ca/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/womenscourt-nativewomens1.pdf [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Enright, M., McCandless, J., and O’Donoghue, A., eds., 2017. Northern / Irish Feminist Judgments: Judges’ Troubles and the Gendered Politics of Identity. Oxford: Hart.
Froc, K., 2010. Multidimensionality and the Matrix: Identifying Charter Violations in Cases of Complex Subordination. Canadian Journal of Law and Society [online], 25 (1), 21-49. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0829320100010206 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Froc, K., 2012. Will “Watertight Compartments” Sink Women’s Charter Rights? In: B. Baines, D. Barak-Erez and T. Kahana, eds., Feminist Constitutionalism: Global Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, 132-148.
Govender, K., and Sheldon, C.T., 2018. R v Kapp. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 30 (2), 248-267. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjwl.30.2.03 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Grear, A., 2012. Learning legal reasoning while rejecting the oxymoronic status of feminist judicial rationalities: a view from the law classroom. The Law Teacher [online], 46 (3), 239-254. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2012.737251 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Harell, A., and Panagos, D., 2013. Locating the Aboriginal Gender Gap: The Political Attitudes and Participation of Aboriginal Women in Canada. Politics & Gender [online], 9 (4), 414-438. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X1300038X [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Hodson, L., and Lavers, T., eds., forthcoming. Feminist Judgments in International Law. Oxford: Hart.
Hughes, E.L., 1995. Fishwives and other tails: Ecofeminism and environmental law. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 8 (2), 502-530.
Hunter, C., and Fitzpatrick, B., 2012. Feminist Judging and Legal Theory. The Law Teacher [online], 46 (3), 255-267. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2012.737250 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Hunter, R., 2012a. The power of feminist judgments? Feminist Legal Studies [online], 20 (2), 135-148. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-012-9202-0 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Hunter, R., 2012b. Feminist judgments as teaching resources. The Law Teacher, 46, 214-226.
Hunter, R., 2018. Feminist Judging in the “Real World”. Oñati Socio-legal Series [online], 8 (9-this volume), 1275-1306. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3198259 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Hunter, R., et al., 2013. Judicial Edgework: Judgment Re-Writing Projects around the World. Roundtable at Law & Society Association of Australia & New Zealand and the Canadian Law and Society Association, Law on the Edge, Vancouver.
Hunter, R., McGlynn, C., and Rackley, E., eds., 2010. Feminist Judgements: from Theory to Practice. Oxford: Hart.
Hunter, R., Roach Anleu, S., and Mack, K., 2016. Judging in lower courts: Conventional, procedural, therapeutic and feminist approaches. International Journal of Law in Context [online], 12 (3), 337-360. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552316000240 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Kapralos, A., 2017. Feminist perspectives key in unbiased court decisions, scholar says. Canadian Lawyer [online], 3 August. Available from: http://www.canadianlawyermag.com/legalfeeds/3954/feminist-perspectives-key-in-unbiased-court-decisions-scholar-says.html [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Koshan, J., 2006. Newfoundland (Treasury Board) v NAPE (Women’s Court of Canada). Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 18 (1), 321-371. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/230236 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Koshan, J., 2007. The Women’s Court of Canada: An Experiment in Feminist Judging. Presented at Law and Society Association, Law and Society in the 21st Century, Berlin.
Koshan, J., 2008. The Persons Case: The Origins and Legacy of the Fight for Legal Personhood (review). Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 20 (2), 343-351. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/266657/pdf [Accessed 16 November 2018].
Koshan, J., 2013. Redressing the Harms of Government (In) Action: A Section 7 Versus Section 15 Charter Showdown. Constitutional Forum [online], 22 (1), 31-46. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.21991/C9D962 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Koshan, J., 2016. Marriage and Advance Consent to Sex: A Feminist Judgment in R v JA. Oñati Socio-legal Series [online], 6 (6), 1377-1404. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2891024 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Koshan, J., 2018. R v JA. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 30 (2), 292-322. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjwl.30.2.06 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Koshan, J., and Watson Hamilton, J., 2011. Meaningless Mantra: Substance Equality after “Withler”. Review of Constitutional Studies [online], 16 (1), 31-62. Available from: https://ualawccsprod.srv.ualberta.ca/images/journals/review/16RevConstStud31.pdf [Accessed 18 July 2018].
Koshan, J., and Watson Hamilton, J., 2018. Alberta v Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 30 (2), 323-358. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjwl.30.2.05 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Koshan, J., et al., 2010. Rewriting Equality: The Pedagogical Use of Women’s Court of Canada Judgments. Canadian Legal Education Annual Review, 4, 121-148.
Kruger, R., 2011. Equality and Unfair Discrimination: Refining the Harksen Test. South African Law Journal [online], 128 (3), 479-512. Available from: https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC53981 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Kyneswood, N., 2016. Review: Heather Douglas, Francesca Bartlett, Trish Luker and Rosemary Hunter (eds): “Australian Feminist Judgments: Righting and Rewriting Law”. Feminist Legal Studies [online], 24, 111-114. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-016-9311-2 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Lamarche, L., 2011. Le Droit Social Et Les Droits Sociaux: Des Outils Dissonants Pour La Régulation Sociale Dans Le Contexte Du Néolibéralisme (Social Rights and Social Law: Human Rights Collision and Neoliberal Damages in Need of Repairs) [online]. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1932441. [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Lawrence, S., 2015. Feminist Judgments (Secondary Literature). Institute for Feminist Legal Studies blog [online], 19 February. Available from: https://ifls.osgoode.yorku.ca/feminist-judgments-secondary-literature/ [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Lawrence, S., 2018. R v Kapp. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 30 (2), 268-291. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjwl.30.2.04 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Lorde, A., 1984. The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House. In: Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. Trumansburg, NY: Crossing Press, 110–114.
Majury, D., 2006. Introducing the Women’s Court of Canada. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 18 (1), 1-26. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/230237 [Accessed 14 May 2018].
Malhotra, R., and Hansen, R.F., 2011. United Nations Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Implications for the Equality Rights of Canadians with Disabilities: The Case of Education. Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice [online], 29 (1), 73-106. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1906731 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Martikainen, T., and Gauthier, F., eds., 2013. Religion in the Neoliberal Age: Political Economy and Modes of Governance. Farnham / Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
McColgan, A., 2014. Discrimination, equality and the law. Oxford: Hart.
McDonald, E., et al., eds., 2017. Feminist Judgments of Aotearoa New Zealand – Te Rino: a Two-Stranded Rope. Oxford: Hart.
McGill, J., 2018. R v Kapp. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 30 (2), 221-247. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjwl.30.2.02 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
McIntyre, S., 2006. The Supreme Court and Section 15: A Thin and Impoverished Notion of Judicial Review. Queen’s Law Journal, 31 (2), 731-769.
McLachlin, B., 2017. Plenary Panel II: High Courts and Political Power: A Conversation with Three Prominent Jurists. ICON-S (International Society of Public Law) 4th annual conference, 2nd Plenary Session. Copenhagen, 6 July.
McLoughlin, K., 2013. What a Difference Difference Makes in Judging the Judges: Gender, Justice and Judicial Power on the Australian High Court. Paper presented at the Australian Feminist Judgments Project Symposium.
McLoughlin, K., 2015. Judicial fictions and the fictive feminists: re-imagination as feminist critique in PGA v The Queen. Griffith Law Review [online], 24, 592 -615. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2015.1126398 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Melville, A.L., 2014. Evaluating Judicial Performance and Addressing Gender Bias. Oñati Socio-legal Series [online], 4 (5), 880-897. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2533912 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Moran, L.J., 2012. Review: Feminist Judgments: From Theory to Practice. Modern Law Review [online], 75 (2), 287-290. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2012.00901.x [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Moreland, S., 2014. Talking about rape-and why it matters: adjudicating rape in the Western Cape High Court. South African Crime Quarterly [online], 47, 5-15. Available from: https://www.ajol.info/index.php/sacq/article/view/102534 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Mossman, M.J., 2016. Gender and Judging: Reflections on “Sisters in Law”: A Review of Linda Hirshman, “Sisters in Law: How Sandra Day O’Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg Went to the Supreme Court and Changed the World”. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 28, 685-696.
National Association of Women and the Law and the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund, 2005. Women’s Rights and Freedoms Conference: 20 Years (In)Equality. Vancouver, April.
NAWL Charitable Trust for Research and Education, 2011. The Gender and the Law Manual: An Introductory Handbook for Law Students. Ottawa: The National Association of Women and the Law Charitable Trust for Research and Education.
Nedelsky, J., 2011. The Reciprocal Relation of Judgment and Autonomy: Walking in Another’s Shoes and Which Shoes to Walk in. In: J. Downie and J. Llewellyn, eds., Being Relational: Reflections on Relational Theory and Health Law. Vancouver: UBC Press, 35-62.
Nelson, E., 2006. Review of “What Roe v Wade Should Have Said”, by Jack. M. Balkin (ed). Osgoode Hall Law Journal [online], 44, 759-765. Available from: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol44/iss4/7/ [Accessed 15 November 2018].
O’Connell, P., 2012. Vindicating Socio-Economic Rights: International Standards and Comparative Experiences. Abingdon: Routledge.
O’Connor, D., Cantillon, S., and Walsh, J., 2008. Rights-Based Approaches to Food Poverty in Ireland [Technical report]. Combat Poverty Agency Working Paper Series [online], 11/01. Combat Poverty Agency, December. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/10197/3851 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Osborne-Brown, S., 2014. The “Right to Sue” as Access to Justice: Discrimination in Employment before the Courts in Canada and California. Canadian Labour & Employment Law Journal [online], 18, 291-330. Available from: https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/canlemj18&div=12&id=&page= [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Pacione, D., 2015, 2016, 2017. LAWS 2501D – Law, State, and Constitution. Ottawa: Carleton University.
Pickering, S.J., 2010. Feminism and Tort Law: Scholarship and Practice. Windsor Review of Legal & Social Issues, 29, 227-251.
Pothier, D., 2006. Eaton v Brant County Board of Education. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 18 (1), 121-142. Available from: http://www.thecourt.ca/the-womens-court-of-canada-eaton-v-brant-county-board-of-education-2006-1-wcr-124/ [Accessed 24 July 2018].
Pothier, D., 2010-2011. Tackling Disability Discrimination at Work: Toward a Systemic Approach. McGill Journal of Law and Health [online], 4 (1), 17-37. Available from: https://mjlhmcgill.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/pothier.pdf [Accessed 16 November 2018].
Quéma, A., 2015. Power and Legitimacy: Law, Culture, and Literature. University of Toronto Press.
Rackley, E., 2012. Why Feminist Legal Scholars Should Write Judgments: Reflections on the Feminist Judgments Project in England and Wales. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 24 (2), 389-413. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/494188/pdf [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Ramshaw, S., 2016. Commentary on Family Planning Association of Northern Ireland v The Minister For Health, Social Services And Public Safety. In: M. Enright, J. McCandless and A. O’Donoghue, eds., 2017. Northern / Irish Feminist Judgments: Judges’ Troubles and the Gendered Politics of Identity. Oxford: Hart.
Réaume, D., 2006. Law v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) (Women’s Court of Canada). Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 18 (1), 143-188. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/230240 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Réaume, D., 2010. The Women’s Court of Canada: Reflections on a Radical Experiment. Presented at the Canadian Bar Association National Legal Conference, Niagara, Ontario.
Réaume, D., 2018. Turning Feminist Judgments into Jurisprudence: The Women's Court of Canada on Substantive Equality. Oñati Socio-legal Series [online], 8 (9-this volume), 1307-1324. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3215739 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Roberts, H., 2015. Review: Australian Feminist Judgments: Righting and Rewriting the Law. Legal Studies [online], 35 (3), 558-565. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/lest.12092 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Roberts, H., and Sweeney, L., 2015. Review Essay: Why (Re)Write Judgments? Review of Australian Feminist Judgments: Righting and Rewriting Law. Sydney Law Review, 37 (3), 457-466. Available from: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/SydLawRw/2015/21.html [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Robinson, E., 2000. Monkey Beach. Toronto: Random House.
Rogers, N., and Maloney, M., 2014. The Australian Wild Law Judgment Project. Alternative Law Journal [online], 39 (3), 172-175. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1037969X1403900307 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Rogers, N., and Maloney, M., eds., 2017. Law as if Earth Really Mattered: The Wild Law Judgment Project. 1st ed. London: Routledge.
Sauls Avolio, V., 2017. Rewriting Reproductive Rights: Applying Feminist Methodology to the European Court of Human Rights' Abortion Jurisprudence. feminists@law [online], 6 (2). Available from: https://journals.kent.ac.uk/index.php/feministsatlaw/article/view/345 [Accessed 16 November 2018].
Sen, J., 2016. Righting Sarla Mudgal v Union of India and Others. Jindal Global Law Review [online], 7 (1), 97-112. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2Fs41020-016-0020-0 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Sharpe, A., 2018. Sexual Intimacy and Gender Identity “Fraud”: Reframing the Legal and Ethical Debate. London: Routledge.
Shilton, E., 2014-2015. Everybody’s Business: Human Rights Enforcement and the Union’s Duty to Accommodate. Canadian Labour & Employment Law Journal, 18, 209-289.
Siddiqui, F., 2012. Internationalizing Gosselin: A Retrospective Case Comment. Canadian Journal of Poverty Law, 1 (1), 74.
Snyder, E., 2014. Indigenous feminist legal theory. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 26 (2), 365-401. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/564334/pdf [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Stanchi, K., Berger, L., and Crawford, B., eds., 2016. Feminist Judgments: Rewritten opinions of the United States Supreme Court. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Strong-Boag, V., 2014. From There to Here: The Making of a Feminist Historian. Canadian Historical Review [online], 95 (2), 242-265. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3138/chr.95104 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Suzack, C., 2011. The Transposition of Law and Literature in “Delgamuukw” and “Monkey Beach”. South Atlantic Quarterly [online], 110 (2), 447-463. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-1162534 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
The Court, n.d. The Court blog / website. Available from: http://www.thecourt.ca/
Thornton, M., 2008. The Retreat from the Critical: Social Science Research in the Corporatised University. Australian Universities Review [online], 50 (1), 5-10. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1314548 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Thornton, M., 2009. Universities upside down: The impact of the new knowledge economy. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 21 (2), 375-393. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjwl.21.2.375 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Watson Hamilton, J., and Koshan, J., 2010. Courting Confusion? Three Recent Alberta Cases on Equality Rights Post-“Kapp”. Alberta Law Review [online], 47 (4), 927-958. Available from: https://www.albertalawreview.com/index.php/ALR/article/viewFile/174/174 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Watson Hamilton, J., and Koshan, J., 2013. The Supreme Court, Ameliorative Programs, and Disability: Not Getting It. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 25 (1), 56-80. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjwl.25.1.056 [Accessed 16 November 2018].
Watson Hamilton, J., and Koshan, J., 2014. Adverse Impact: The Supreme Court’s Approach to Adverse Effects Discrimination under Section 15 of the Charter. Review of Constitutional Studies, 19, 191-235.
Women’s Court of Canada, 2006. Rewriting Equality / Recrire l’Égalité. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 18 (1), 1-371. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/issue/12397 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Women’s Court of Canada, 2008. Women’s Court of Canada: Future Directions [online]. Available from https://www.law.utoronto.ca/documents/conferences/rewritingequality08_future.pdf [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Women’s Court of Canada, 2018. Rewriting Equality II / Récrire l’Égalité II. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law [online], 30 (2), 1-358. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/issue/38985 [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Women’s Court of Canada, n.d. Women’s Court of Canada website. Available from: http://womenscourt.ca/
Young, M., 2005. Section 7 and the Politics of Social Justice. University of British Columbia Law Review [online], 38 (2), 539-560. Available from: https://commons.allard.ubc.ca/fac_pubs/355/ [Accessed 15 November 2018].
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Jennifer Koshan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
