Legal Architecture addresses how the environment of the trial can be seen as a physical expression of our relationship with ideals of justice. It provides an alternative account of the trial, which charts the troubled history of notions of due process and participation. In contrast to visions of judicial space as neutral, Linda Mulcahy argues that understanding the factors that determine the internal design of the courthouse and courtroom are crucial to a broader and more nuanced understanding of the trial. Partitioning of the courtroom into zones and the restriction of movement within it are the result of turf wars about who can legitimately participate in the legal arena and call the judiciary to account. The gradual containment of the public, the increasing amount of space allocated to advocates, and the creation of dedicated space for journalists and the jury, all have complex histories that deserve attention. But these issues are not only of historical significance. Across jurisdictions, questions are now being asked about the internal configurations of the courthouse and courtroom, and whether standard designs meet the needs of modern participatory democracies: including questions about the presence and design of the modern dock; the ways in which new technologies threaten to change the dynamics of the trial and lead to the dematerialization of our primary site of adversarial practice; and the extent to which courthouses are designed in ways which realise their professed status as public spaces. This fascinating and original reflection on legal architecture will be of interest to socio-legal or critical scholars working in the field of legal geography, legal history, criminology, legal systems, legal method, evidence, human rights and architecture.

click here for publisher's site

The fourth edition of this cases and materials book published in September 2010 aims to introduce law students to traditional foundations of legal reasoning alongside socio-legal and critical material which questions the canon. In addition to the material in previous editions the most recent version of this cases and materials book reflects on ongoing discussion about human rights, the changing landscape of dispute resolution and diversity in the legal profession; the reform of the tribunal system; the opening of the Supreme Court and the ways in which the insights of comparative lawyers have resonance in contemporary debates aout the multi-cultural nature of our society

click here for publisher's site

click here for author podcast

Contract Law in Perspective complements 'black letter' treatments of contract by looking at legal doctrine and statutes in their social, political and economic contexts. In addition to examining the key doctrines in the field, it explains the ideology behind them and considers the extent to which they serve the needs of the business community and consumers. By taking the ‘big ideas’ in contract theory and relating these to practice, the book hopes to broaden understanding and appreciation of the contemporary relevance subject.

 click here for publisher's site

This edited collection questions the assumptions about feminist perspectives on contract law made in mainstream scholarship and the ideologies that underpin them, drawing attention to the ways in which the law of contract has facilitated the virtual exclusion of women, the feminine and the private sphere from legal discourse.

 click here for publisher's site

This book looks at the dynamics of doctor-patient disputes. Reflecting on fifteen years of empirical research on disputes in the NHS it considers the contexts in which these disputes arise, the different ways in which the parties construct disputing narratives and moral identities in the course of making and defending their claims, and the extent to which existing systems for resolving disputes are sensitive to their needs. Based on research with patients, relatives, doctors and NHS managers, the book analyses how they perceive these disputes and what they seek to achieve by holding each other to account.

 click here for publisher's site

This article considers the relationship between the interests of individual litigants and the facilitation of doctrine for the collective good. More specifically, it examines the extent to which the policy and rules governing the management of civil litigation reflect a genuine commitment to the development of the common law. It is argued that litigation models in England send out conflicting messages about the commitment our society has to nurturing precedents and that we remain ambivalent about whether resources should be directed to identifying cases with precedent-setting potential. Contrary to recent policy statements that encourage disputants to resolve issues in private forums such as mediation, this article concludes that the time is ripe to turn our attention to the equally important issue of how to ensure that certain types of cases reach a public forum.

click here for full text via OUP [ON CAMPUS]
click here for full text via OUP [OFF CAMPUS]

Whilst feminist legal scholarship has thrived within universities and in some sectors of legal practice, it has yet to have much impact within the judiciary or on judicial thinking. Thus, while feminist legal scholarship has generated comprehensive critiques of existing legal doctrine, there has been little opportunity to test or apply feminist knowledge in practice, in decisions in individual cases. In this book, a group of feminist legal scholars put theory into practice in judgment form, by writing the 'missing' feminist judgments in key cases. Linda Mulcahy and Cathy Andrew's contribution to this book is a re-thinking of the judgment in Baird Textile Holdings v Marks and Spencer Plc and is accompanied by a commentary on the case and new judgment by John Wightman.

click here for publisher's site

The aim of the research reported here was to establish an independent evidence base for identifying the value and the limits of mediation as an alternative to, or used alongside, judicial review. It was devised in response to claims made by government and mediation providers that mediation can lead to savings in costs as well as in court time, and provide remedies and solutions to disputes that cannot be offered by the court. These claims were considered in the specific context of judicial review, which not only has an important constitutional function, but, compared to other forms of civil litigation, offers litigants flexibility, low costs and speed. It is argued that claims as to the value of mediation need to be examined in light of the realities of judicial review litigation.

"…provide[s] an illuminating picture of how judicial review claims are run and resolved by lawyers, judges and mediators. They raise the curtain on the world of pre-hearing settlements and provide a surprisingly optimistic picture of the ability fo lawyers to come to staisfactory outcomes without the intervention of mediators and judges. The Public Law project, and the Nuffield Foundation which funded the research, deserve high praise for the quality of the papers and the comprehensive nature of the research'.

Toby Fischer in Judicial Review, 2009

 click here for full report

Shortlisted for the 2009 Socio-Legal Studies Association article prize. this article examines the implications of allowing witnesses to give evidence in trials from other locations through the medium of ‘live link’. Academic commentary on this technological aid has to date focused on the impact it has on the defendant’s right to cross-examine or the ability to judge demeanour. Whilst these issues are important, this essay focuses on a less commented on implication of live link; its impact on our conception of where and how adjudication takes place. Particular emphasis is placed on the ways in which the courtroom as the prime site of legal practice is in danger of being dematerialised and the effect this is likely to have on the legitimacy of the trial as an authentic legal and public ritual.

click here for full text via Blackwells Synergy [ON CAMPUS]
click here for full text via Blackwells Synergy [OFF CAMPUS]

This article looks at a much-neglected topic in accounts of the modern legal system: the architecture of law courts. It is argued that a closer examination of radical changes to the ways in which the internal space of the courthouse and courtroom were organised in the mid-nineteenth century can tell us much about how lawyers came to dominate the trial. The essay focuses on the design and planning of the Manchester Assize Courts, a building which can accurately be described as one of the first, if not the first, modern courthouse. It considers how the courthouse came to symbolise new ideas about the civic sphere, the increased reliance on the segregation of participants in the trial, and the role of law in Victorian society. Particular attention is placed on the link between new social and cultural movements and the architect, Alfred Waterhouse.

click here for full text via Ingenta [ON CAMPUS]
click here for full text via Ingenta [OFF CAMPUS]

This article looks at the interface between the design of courtrooms and the notion of participatory justice. In contrast to a vision of judicial space as neutral this article argues that understanding the factors which determine the internal design of the courtroom are crucial to a broader and more nuanced understanding of judgecraft. The use of space in the courtroom has changed significantly since custom built courthouses first began to be built and these changes often reflect struggles for territory. In this essay I focus on the ways in the role of the spectator has been marginalized within the court and led to the demise of the notion of ‘public’ trial. This has been achieved through a series of design guides which ensure that participants in the trial are isolated and surveyed. The origins of these guides can be traced to the mid-Victoria era in which the public were often conceived of as threatening and ‘dirty’.

click here for full text via Swetwise [ON CAMPUS]
click here for full text via Swetwise [OFF CAMPUS]