Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAlexandris Polomarkakis, K
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-19T08:24:39Z
dc.date.issued2022-05-18
dc.date.updated2022-05-18T20:29:13Z
dc.description.abstractThis article problematises the gendered dimension of litigation in EU equality case-law.Relying on feminist readings of Bourdieu’s concept of capital,it introduces the notion of gendered capital as an explanatory framework to illustrate and evaluate the distinct experiences between women and men litigants in the legal field. The article puts this framework to the test by undertaking a macro-level mixed-methods study of 352 preliminary references on EU non-discrimination law, drawing on the Equality Law in Europe: A New Generation database. The findings confirm the plausibility of this framework, with gendered capital varying depending on the period when and the Member State where the case was lodged, as well as on the ground of discrimination raised. As a result, by looking at the role of litigants’ gender in EU equality case-law, this article joins the emerging field of mixed-methods studies offering novel insights into the effectiveness of judicial decision-making.en_GB
dc.identifier.citationPublished online 18 May 2022en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12745
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/129680
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0001-5664-4372 (Alexandris Polomarkakis, Konstantinos)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWiley / Modern Law Reviewen_GB
dc.rights© 2022 The Authors. The Modern Law Review published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Modern Law Review Limited. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.en_GB
dc.titleGendered capital and litigants in EU equality case-lawen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2022-05-19T08:24:39Z
dc.identifier.issn0026-7961
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Wiley via the DOI in this record. en_GB
dc.identifier.eissn1468-2230
dc.identifier.journalModern Law Reviewen_GB
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2022-03-09
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2022-03-09
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2022-05-18T20:29:15Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2022-06-13T13:20:04Z
refterms.panelCen_GB
refterms.dateFirstOnline2022-05-18


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2022 The Authors. The Modern Law Review published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Modern Law Review Limited.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2022 The Authors. The Modern Law Review published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Modern Law Review Limited. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.