Barrister Gender and Litigant Success on the High Court of Australia
We examine the relationship between gender of the barrister and appeal outcomes on the High Court of Australia. We find evidence of asymmetries in that gender matters if a female barrister presents oral argument for the appellant opposed to a respondent, for which one or more male barristers present oral argument, but the reverse is not true. Specifically, we find that an appellant represented in oral argument by a female barrister, opposed to a respondent represented in oral argument by a male barrister, is less likely to receive the vote of a justice in the majority. However, we also find that the appellant disadvantage of having a female barrister present oral argument is (partially) offset in the case of liberal justices and on panels having a higher proportion of female justices. The extent to which the disadvantage is offset and potentially turns from being a disadvantage to an advantage depends on the degree towhich the judge is liberal and the proportion of female justices on the panel.
|Date of creation:||May 2013|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Department of Economics, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia|
Web page: http://business.monash.edu/economics
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Web: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/eco/research/papers/ Email: |
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mos:moswps:2013-15. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Simon Angus)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.