English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article examines whether the Law Council of Australia's Policy 2001 on the Process of Judicial Appointments sets out a model for judicial appointment, which will be beneficial to future female (and 'others' of non-dominant background) judicial appointees. Even today numbers of female judges are comparatively small. When female judicial appointments have been made in recent years, their 'merit' as appointees has been scrutinised in a way in which male colleagues have not been similarly subjected. This article examines the strengths and shortcomings of the LCA Policy as a model for judicial appointment protocols (to be developed by State and federal Attorneys-General) from the perspective of whether a Protocol based on the Policy is likely to produce a more representative and inclusive judiciary with a 21st century understanding of equality before the law.

The Law Council of Australia Policy 2001 on the Process of Judicial Appointments: Any Good News for Future Female Judicial Appointees?