Would it surprise you to learn that complainers in sexual offence cases have no automatic right to anonymity in Scotland? This Campaign begins with a simple statement of fact. The idea that complainers “automatically have a right to anonymity under UK law” is often referred to in Scotland – but it has no foundation in Scots law.

We believe this situation is highly problematic. We believe something as important as complainer anonymity should not have to rely on journalists following professional codes of practice, or the general public’s self-restraint on Facebook, Twitter or Instagram.

In our experience, most people are shocked to discover that people in Scotland who allege they have been victims of sexual offences have no legal right to anonymity. While Scottish courts can make orders prohibiting the identification of complainers under section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, these orders are not automatic and are not sought in the overwhelming majority of cases. This leaves a critical gap in our law. Scottish complainers are exposed to an acute risk of being publicly identified in connection with the case, without any effective legal remedy.

We think this is a problem Holyrood can fix – and fix fairly easily.

As a result we are establishing the Campaign for Complainer Anonymity led by lecturers in law Dr. Andrew Tickell and Seonaid Stevenson-McCabe, working with our GCU law students.

We will engage with the wider public and complainers to look at what anonymity means to them – are Scots aware of the law as it stands? How does this impact on decision-making about disclosure? How should the law be reformed?

We will also work with students to put the Scottish experience in its wider legal context by looking at how other jurisdictions across the world handle the issue of restrictions of publicising the identity of complainers or publishing material likely to identify them. This will help us think critically about what any law reform efforts in Scotland could and should look like.

There are different models for how Scots Law can be changed, better to protect complainer anonymity and more clearly to set out the rights and responsibilities of people writing about these criminal cases. This campaign aims to identify and progress concrete legislative reforms which can be adopted by the Scottish Government and Parliament to update the law, better to reflect public understandings and attitudes towards this important issue.

We will soon be launching our dedicated Campaign website but, if you want further information about the Campaign in the meantime, please contact: Seonaid Stevenson-McCabe Seonaid.stevenson@gcu.ac.uk Dr. Andrew Tickell Andrew.Tickell@gcu.ac.uk

At Glasgow Caledonian University we thrive on ideas and support innovation. We also value the importance of social responsibility. Students come to us from all backgrounds, for our knowledge and experience and to enhance their career and personal ambitions.  Our external partners come to us to find the latest research-led thinking and to access the talent of our students.

This year more than ever, we are reaching out to our external partners and beyond, to enable us to continue to offer our law students the best possible experience, despite these difficult and uncertain times.

As part of our LLB curriculum, we offer employability sessions within our modules. Professional Links is one such unique module. The module is designed to allow students to gain academic credit towards their degree based on practical experience.  The GCU LLB programme is highly committed to widening access to the Scottish legal profession, both in terms of studying and career progression and the need to find opportunities for our students has never been greater. There is real benefit to students being able to undertake a short placement in a law firm, shadow experienced solicitors and gaining first-hand experience of law at work. The majority of our students do not have family or personal connections within the legal sector.   At GCU we work tirelessly to bridge the gap and provide our students with work experience to help prepare them for life after university but, more importantly, to assist them with securing future training contracts.  Research has shown experiential learning to be a powerful tool, which complements the theory being studied. It also shows the benefit to host firms from gaining flexible, motivated and talented students.

If you are employed in the legal sector, whether a solicitor, Advocate or HR Manager, who is able to offer our students an appropriate short term placement, virtual or otherwise, we’d like to hear from you. Please contact Claire McFadzean, Academic Director of the Law Clinic and Module Leader on claire.mcfadzean@gcu.ac.uk by 30^th September 2020. Claire will provide further details and discuss arrangements.

In these challenging times, it’s more important than ever to reach out and help.

This week’s ‘Women in Law Wednesday’ is Dr. Karla Perez Portilla, who has been a lecturer here at GCU Law since October 2018. We were keen to talk to her not only because of how her career relates to law, but because of how her legal work intersects with social justice. In fact, we approached her for the project after she delivered an extremely interesting lecture on ‘Feminism and Jurisprudence’ to LLB3 last semester. Karla has given some brilliant and insightful answers about her career progression and what it means to be a woman in law.

Karla explains that her ‘career started in Mexico researching and teaching Constitutional Law, Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Law at the National Autonomous University of Mexico’. She has also ‘been a guest lecturer at the University of Strathclyde and Teaching Fellow at University College London, Faculty of Law’ which is where she completed her PhD. When asked about her career journey, Karla explained once she had graduated it was not easy to find a job in the UK. On top of this, she was also a new mum. She ‘therefore started volunteering, and little by little, I built my reputation in Glasgow, combining my academic experience with ‘hands-on’ work for the third sector’. Her work in the third sector consisted of prejudice reduction programmes, delivering training and implementing and evaluating interventions. She was a community practitioner which, she explains, ‘was a role that has enriched and informed my teaching methods and approaches’. She has brought this experience she speaks of into her role at GCU Law.

We asked Karla what she believes her greatest achievements were in her career journey so far. She explains that as she likes thinking and developing ideas and theories with practical application that a highlight in her career has been to have published two different single author books with renowned publishing house – one in English and one in Spanish. She explains, ‘it is unusual to publish a book based on an LLB dissertation in Mexico and having published a revised version of my PhD thesis with Routledge, is equally joyful.’ Further to this Karla explains that the revised version allowed her to ‘expand the linguistic extent of her contributions to legal knowledge’ and demonstrate her ‘commitment to social justice and academic rigour’.

There are various reasons, Karla says, for why these publications were a highlight in her career but she notes two specific reasons. Firstly, ‘the crave for and the difficulties in achieving recognition as a woman of colour’ and secondly because it has given her the opportunity to use her books ‘in academic settings and within the wider community in international and local conferences, specialised courses, training programmes, academic modules and diplomas both in Mexico and in the UK.’

In response to a question about gender balance in the LLB, Karla explains that there is not much difference between the students at GCU Law and the students where she completed her degree in Mexico, ‘there are still many women at the beginning of a law degree and very few making it to the top, in virtually all sectors.’ An interesting insight into the universality of the issue.

We next wanted to ask Karla about whether she has ever felt disadvantaged as a woman in law, ‘as a woman generally and as a woman from an ethnic minority background in the UK, I have always felt that I have to work harder, stay longer, excel, etc… I have felt this pressure both in Mexico and in the UK.’ On the other hand, she feels that ‘being a woman from an ethnic minority background with experience of migration has helped me make meaningful contributions to academia and in practice. Lived experience coupled with rigorous research and practical work allows us to provide valuable insights in order to bring about positive exchange.’ She finishes her answer with an interesting insight; ‘I think it is fair to say that, to a large extent, lived experience is a basic ingredient for bringing about social justice.’

Finally, as we ask all our interviewees, we asked Karla what being a woman in law meant to her:

‘It means the need to recognise that being a woman is a range of experiences shaped by skin colour, ethnic origin, nationality, sexual orientation, gender identity, socio-economic background, religion, etc.

For me, being a woman in law means a desire and the possibility to make the understanding and use of such terms, one that actually includes the diversity, roles and identities of women. I believe that we have to make a conscious effort to identify, seek to portray and celebrate the experiences of those overlooked or marginalised. It would be useful to make the most of the concept of intersectionality, as coined by Kimberle Crenshaw, in order to include and make visible a range of real lived experiences, histories, challenges and achievements.’

We thank Karla for her valuable contribution to the project. We hope that her inspired words have provoked thought about how the law can be used for social justice.

By Lucy Mackay LLB3

Following a recent terrorist attack on the 2 February which involved the automatic early release of a prisoner Sudesh Amman attacking innocent people on the streets of Streatham, new emergency legislation has been passed to prevent this happening again. Deputy Speaker Nigel Evans announced The Terrorist Offenders (Restriction of Early Release) Bill was passed by MPs. Amman had only been released around a week earlier after serving half of his sentence of three years and four months for terror offences. Boris Johnson declared that there will be “fundamental changes to the system for dealing with those convicted of terrorism offences”.

The previous system allowed for those found guilty of terror offences being free to go after serving half their sentence. The new law will ensure terrorists serve a minimum of two-thirds of their sentence before they will be considered for release. There has been criticism from inmate’s lawyers and some are preparing a legal challenge on the basis that when convicted inmates were told they would automatically be released half way and therefore have a ‘legitimate expectation’ of being released at this date. Ministers are confident the bill is legally sound and believe that they are altering sentences not completely changing them.

Since the passing of this legislation the independent Parole Board will only release an inmate if they are satisfied they no longer pose a threat. Upon their release they will be subject to the strictest possible conditions and ongoing monitoring. However, in the case of Sudesh Amman, if this legislation had been in place at the time it would have only made a difference of an extra six months in prison. Many argue that it only allows for a brief extension in protection. The success of passing The Terrorist Offenders (Restriction of Early Release) Bill will be evaluated over the upcoming year to asses if it is protecting the public further.

Carys McIntyre, GCU Law Clinic Volunteer

Helena Kennedy QC was born and grew up in the South side of Glasgow. She was, at first, going to study English at Glasgow University. However, she changed her mind and studied Law in London at the Council of Legal Education instead. It was this decision that lead to Helena becoming one of the most prominent and important female lawyers of our time.

Over a career spanning four decades, Helena has focused on ensuring those who are most vulnerable have a voice in our legal system. She is a member of the Doughty Street Chambers in London, and specialises in human rights law, civil liberties and constitutional issues. She has acted in a number of high-profile cases that includes – but is not limited to – the Brighton Bombing, the Guildford Four appeal and the bombing of the Israeli embassy. Her current work encompasses cases linked with the rise of terrorism.

In addition, Helena is a patron for numerous charities including Safe Hands (a charity dedicated to helping maternal and infant health in Ethiopia), sits as a Labour member in the House of Lords and served as a Principal of Mansfield College, Oxford from 2011 to 2018. This highlights that Helena is an incredible woman and lawyer, and her copious achievements should be admired by all law students and lawyers alike.

Moreover, Helena has written some of the most important books about women and the British Justice System. This is how I discovered Helena Kennedy. In 1993, Helena wrote a book entitled, “Eve was Framed: Women and British Justice.” This book provided a female perspective on how the law treated women. 25 years later, Helena wrote a second book on the same topic entitled, “Eve was Shamed: How British Justice is Failing Women.” I have read this book, and truly believe it is a must read for everybody. Helena manages to write openly and honestly about a difficult topic, providing a coherent argument throughout about the injustices women still face in the modern day. The book covers every topic, from the disparity of female judges at the top of the legal system to the difference in incarceration rates for men and women facing similar charges. She provides an interesting perspective on sexual abuse cases, condemning the decision not to remove victims’ sexual history from rape trials, and also examines the deep-rooted issues that led to events such as the Rotherham scandal, rather than singularly blaming it on the girls ‘lifestyle choices’. These sections make a particularly interesting read in light of the MeToo movement.

Helena spoke of her sadness at having to write a second book on this topic 25 years after her first, but it’s importance should not be undermined. Although this book provides an in-depth insight into the failings of the justice system for women, it highlights that work has been done since the original publication in 1993. Furthermore, it proves that with continuous work the justice system can work equally for men and women.

Shona Christie, LLB3, GCU Law Clinic Volunteer

As we have mentioned previously on the blog, this year marks 100 years since the Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919 was introduced. This landmark act proved to be revolutionary, as it provided women with the opportunity to enter the legal profession for the first time. It was Carrie Morrison, Mary Pickup, Mary Sykes and Maud Crofts who took advantage of this incredible opportunity.

Carrie Morrison, at 34 years old, was the first woman to receive acceptance as a solicitor in England and Wales in December 1922. She spent most of her time working as a ‘Poor Man’s Lawyer’ in the East End of London. Furthermore, she also represented prostitutes in court, worked for the Women and Children’s Protection Society and even defended the Becontree Estate protesters in 1932. A pioneering woman who dedicated her career to helping those less fortunate, Carrie set a high bar for other women to follow.

The other three women qualified in January 1923, and also led ground-breaking careers. Mary Pickup worked alongside her husband after getting accepted, having spent the 10 years before that also assisting him. She also worked at the Poor Man’s Lawyer Department in Birmingham. Mary was also the only one of the four women who had children to care for whilst studying for her exams. However, it was her determination that allowed her to complete her exams alongside having a family.

Mary Sykes worked for her father’s firm until 1930, when she set up her own legal firm – Mary Sykes and Co. Her father – also a solicitor – died in 1921 so never got to see his only daughter’s achievements. Yet her perseverance and determination allowed her, in 1935, to become the only woman on Huddersfield Town Council and Huddersfield’s only female practising lawyer simultaneously.

Maud Crofts spent a lifetime campaigning for woman’s rights. Even through the First World War she did not give up her fight, instead gaining experience in a solicitor’s office at the same time. Once qualified, Maud and her husband set up their own practice alongside Maud’s brother, Robert Ingram. Maud did not stop work even when she had children, although at the time it was seen as the right thing to do. Maud did not retire until ill-health left her with no other choice. She was 66 years old. Both Maud’s daughter Rosemary and grand-daughter Mary also followed in her footsteps and entered the legal profession. This made them England’s first three generational family of female solicitors.

All four of these women overcame obstacles and fought hard for the right to practice law. They paved the way for women in law now, and in their time they truly changed the legal world for the better.

By Shona Christie

GCU Law Clinic Volunteer, LLB3

For this week’s ‘Women in Law Wednesday’ we have chosen Seonaid Stevenson-McCabe, who we had the pleasure of talking to. We found out all about her journey in the legal profession so far, discussed inequality in law and some inspiring advice was shared.

In her relatively short career Seonaid has achieved an incredible amount. In 2012 she graduated with a 1^st class degree in Law and English Literature from the University of Glasgow before studying for an LLM in International Law, which was funded by the Carnegie Cameron Scholarship.  She then worked at the International Criminal Court in The Hague before returning to Glasgow to study for the Diploma in Professional Legal Practice (graduating first in her year). Seonaid then trained at Maclay, Murray and Spens (now Dentons) and is now a human rights lawyer with The Ethnic Minorities Law Centre in Glasgow. She also works part time as a Research Assistant with the University of Glasgow on their project celebrating the centenary of women in law (https://www.gla.ac.uk/schools/law/100years/).

Seonaid is the co-founder of RebLaw Scotland, something that we were especially interested in talking to her about. Throughout the interview, the clear theme was Seonaid’s passion for social justice and using law as a tool to achieve that. Which is exactly what the ‘rebellious lawyering’ project is about. ‘Rebellious lawyering’ is a movement founded by the UCLA academic, Professor Gerald López, which has resulted in the annual Yale RebLaw conference.  Seonaid attended the first RebLaw conference in the UK in London during her traineeship and brought the idea of a similar Scottish conference back up to Glasgow.  She co-founded RebLaw Scotland with Mairi McAllan and Katy MacAskill, women who she trained with at Maclay Murray Spens.  The friendship between the three, Seonaid notes, was one of the highlights of her traineeship.

RebLaw Scotland hosts an annual conference, where they bring together professionals from the third sector, from academia, and practising lawyers, to talk about tackling social problems through radical lawyering. In recent years they have discussed legal responses to homelessness, refugee rights and tackling forced marriage. Seonaid also talks of other plans, such as visiting law schools around Scotland in the new year. We would strongly encourage anyone reading to keep an eye out for upcoming RebLaw Scotland events!

Another interesting part of Seonaid’s journey so far is that she initially did not want to be a practicing solicitor. When she first went into her undergraduate degree, she wanted to be a journalist but realised that she did really enjoy the law, even the ‘boring’ bits! She still however did not opt to do the diploma after graduation and worked for a small charity as a research and policy officer before completing her LLM.  She then started work at the International Criminal Court, which is where she finally decided she wanted to qualify as a lawyer. In The Hague she saw human rights law in practice and decided that she wanted to be able to advocate on behalf of victims of human rights abuses in the judicial system.  This is what then pushed her to go back to Glasgow and undertake the diploma and traineeship.

Despite her achievements, Seonaid was keen to explain that it hasn’t been all plain sailing and she points to many incredible women in her life who have helped her along the way.  She highlighted in particular the support of her mum, who is also a lawyer, which she notes has undeniably placed her in a privileged position. She said “I think every achievement I have ever made is thanks to her” and that, therefore, “women supporting women is such an important principle for me.”

As an example of this, Seonaid told us about feeling like an imposter when she first moved to The Hague.  Helena Kennedy QC, author of ‘Eve Was Framed’ (and more recently ‘Eve Was Shamed’) had long been an inspiration for Seonaid.  Helena Kennedy QC was an alumna of Seonaid’s secondary school, one of the largest comprehensive schools in the UK.  Seonaid explained that she would regularly read ‘Eve Was Framed’ as a source of inspiration when her confidence was failing. Struggling with her confidence when she first moved to The Hague, Seonaid picked up the book and decided to email Helena Kennedy QC to thank her, never expecting a response. She was stunned to receive a reply, filled with encouragement. This small act of kindness demonstrated to Seonaid how powerful it can be for women to support one another.  She goes on to explain that the feeling that she got from the email – that she was not alone – inspires her work with the University of Glasgow ‘100 Voices for 100 Years’ project. “When you read the voices of other women saying isn’t this hard, isn’t this difficult, it makes you realise that it is not just you that feels like that, other women do too.” She explained that the project is a space for talking about gender equality but that there also needs to be wider changes in terms of diversity in the legal profession, particularly in terms of representation of those from ethnic minority backgrounds.

Finally, we asked Seonaid the question we ask all our interviewees – what does being a women in law mean to you?

“It means that I am in a privileged position to use my voice to support vulnerable women. I try to do that in my work with migrant women, and I try to do that to support other women in law to achieve what they want to. Being a lawyer is a massive privilege and I think that we should use that little bit of power for good.”

We are very grateful to Seonaid for sitting down with us and talking about her experiences, and we think she may be on the receiving end of emails such as the one she sent to Helena Kennedy QC in the not too distant future.

By Lucy Mackay

Madeleine Heggs set up her own legal practice over 60 years ago. She was brought up by a single mother during the war. After her father was killed, Madeleine went to a school which ‘knew nothing about careers’, and girls were expected to become secretaries, or at best, teachers – if you were very bright. Heggs was the first from her school to study Law, and felt inspired to do so after her father’s old lawyer offered her his old articles. The only girl at her entire law school, she described the experience as ‘lonely’. Madeleine later went on to work for Bedford Lowe.

After living for a time in the US for her husband’s job, Madeleine qualified as a solicitor in 1954, and set up her own practice at her home in Ealing when she was expecting her first child in 1957. Over the next 24 years, she built up a successful practice dealing with residential and commercial conveyancing, probate, civil litigation and family law. Working from home, she was able to take her children to and from school and then meet up and speak to clients at night to make up time. And did her husband help with the kids? “He belonged to that generation where men don’t help” she explains, “he liked his wife going to work, but that didn’t mean that he had to join in the housework, it’s a generational thing.”

In 1975, Madeleine got a letter asking if she’d act as Chairman of National Insurance tribunals, which changed the trajectory of her career. Later, she became a Commissioner; saying to First Hundred Years; “I was appointed in November 1981, and it wasn’t until December 1979 that solicitors were entitled even to act as Commissioners, and there had never been a woman. They were all QCs or Benchers and I was a suburban solicitor… the only woman and practising solicitor amongst 14 men.” FHY’s asked; Are things better for women now than they were? Madeleine believes that they may not be. “I look at my grandchildren and they have enormous pressures”, she says. “You have to do your exams first and then you’ve got to find a traineeship – it’s not easy and it’s very expensive and competitive.” Women are also having to work “colossal hours, which is hard if you’ve got a family.” Madeleine also criticises the lack of legal aid, saying while “a lot of people have rights, they can’t exercise them because they haven’t got the money for it.” Truer words have never been spoken.

Madeleine, who retired at the age of 72, is celebrating her 90th birthday soon. Madeleine has shared with many how she enjoyed her career despite how different the profession was when she was in practice. Discrimination was not acknowledged by her as an issue. She was though, an exceptional lawyer who succeeded in breaking down barriers, holding a judicial post for 20 years plus.

Imaan Khan, GCU Law Clinic Volunteer – LLB3

Our Women in Law Wednesday this week is Cheryl Liddell. Cheryl studied Law at GCU and was also the Student Director of the Law Clinic in her 4^thyear. Now that she has completed her diploma and is embarking on her traineeship, we caught up with her so that we could find out where she is now, get some advice for those following the same path as her and ask her opinion on the ‘women in law’ project..

We started by asking her the – rather generic – question, what inspired you to choose law? Cheryl replied with a rather generic (her words) answer, saying that law had always seemed really interesting on TV programmes. She explained that no one in her family had ever been to University so she didn’t have anyone to talk to who had done law, so she decided to go to college for two years first. She admitted that she enjoyed it so much more than she thought she would, so decided to progress into the LLB at GCU. Due to the two years she spent at college, she felt this gave her a helpful start in 1^st year as she had covered a lot of the content already. Third year was where it started to get harder for her (as we all know too well).

Talking more about her time at GCU, Cheryl mentioned two of the GCU Law lecturers, Claire McFadzean and Alison Britton. She had worked with Claire through the Law Clinic and found her move from private practice to academia inspiring as a law student, similarly with Alison’s involvement with the Scottish Government, taking seminars and mountain climbing feats.

Moving on to her involvement with the Law Clinic, Cheryl explains that she was involved with the Law Clinic from 1^styear. She stressed the importance of this involvement from the start of her degree throughout her interview, and encourages future managers to make sure that they are making 1^st year students feel valued and involved. Talking of her achievements in the clinic, Cheryl explains that while she was student director the Law Clinic started to get recognised in the wider community and began to win awards. She attributes this to past managers as well. She also explains that she went to court once when volunteering at the Law Clinic, which as well as being an achievement at the time is also helping her with the litigation side of her traineeship now.

Moving on to where she is now, Cheryl explains that she is doing in house traineeship at Arnold Clark, which she is really enjoying. It is different from traditional traineeships in the sense that you do not get given seats, you are essentially there for any legal need that the company has. Anyone can come round and ask you a question. There is not the same hierarchy that there is in private practice, people from other departments will ask you for the same help whether you are a trainee or not. While she explains this can be a good thing, it can also be challenging as there are not as many people to ask for advice as in private practice. If someone chooses to come to her with her problem, which can be to do with a large range of legal issues, it is her responsibility to handle it.

Discussing her journey into her traineeship, Cheryl explains that she did not specifically choose to go in house. She began at Arnold Clark as a legal advisor, after a couple of months her boss offered her a traineeship. A good point to note for anyone who is feeling stressed about going into the diploma without a traineeship.

We then moved on to chat more about ‘women in law’.  We asked her if she had ever felt disadvantaged as a woman in law, or alternatively, motivated. She explains that, although it is not a direct disadvantage to her, it is strange to go from the degree where classes are 80% female, to having 1 female to 10 males in practice. It is a stark difference and she wonders where everyone went. She definitely finds that being a woman motivates her. She wants to support the other women that she knows in the profession, explaining that, for example, if a job came up she would be more likely to send it to her female friends.

Finally, the question we ask every week, what does being a women in law mean to you? ‘It shows the development of how far women have come in law. So this project is obviously to commemorate the first 100 years of women entering the legal profession. The fact that when you look around the classroom that there can be 90% females, when 100 years ago we wouldn’t even be able to enter the profession. Now we have figures like Lady Hale. It shows society’s progression and their support of females in more extensive ways allowing them to do things that were once perceived as strictly ‘male jobs.’

Thank you to Cheryl for meeting us and getting involved with the project!

Dame Margaret Henderson Kidd QC paved the way for aspiring female lawyers; establishing and securing women’s role within the legal profession. Born in 1900, in Bo’ness, during a time where tending to their house and children was generally the extent of a woman’s responsibilities, it would be hard to imagine that just two decades later the first woman would graduate with an LLB; especially in a society which granted women no political rights. Nevertheless, Margaret, following in the footsteps of her solicitor father, James, wished to pursue a diplomatic career.

Women were not recognised as “people” within the meaning of the Solicitors Act 1843 but with the introduction of the Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919, women could now work as practicing lawyers and sit as jurors, as well as perform a number of other jobs previously thought only capable by men.

Margaret graduated from the University of Edinburgh, in 1922, with a master’s degree and an LLB. She was called to the Faculty of Advocates in 1923, after training with Mitchell & Baxter WS, becoming the first female lawyer to have the right to plead in the Supreme Court of Scotland. She remained the only female advocate up until 1948. Throughout her career, Margaret continued to break into undiscovered territories, obtaining a considerable amount of ‘firsts’ for women in the history of Britain; becoming not only the first female advocate to appear before the House of Lords, but also the first woman appointed King’s Council in Britain, as well as the first woman to hold the post of Sheriff Principal for Dumfries and Galloway.

Margaret helped shape the future for aspiring female lawyers, giving speeches and lectures and encouraging more and more women to become solicitors as the close work with people would better mould public opinion into one that believed that women were both equally as capable and deserving of the right to study and practice law as their male counterparts.

By Alana Farewell, GCU Law Clinic Volunteer, LLB1