Family law has not only become a specialism in its own right, but family law practitioners have claimed for themselves special characteristics. This article reviews the attributes and skills to which the legal profession, and particularly the solicitors branch, aspires. It notes that the ‘specialist’ forms of client care and case management, familiarity with rules and procedures and a conciliatory approach are not unique to family lawyering. Family lawyers also require themselves to have knowledge of ‘non-law’ matters, especially those relating to the welfare of children. On reviewing recent empirical research studies about the work of solicitors, the article asserts that, for family lawyers, non-law norms control their practice and form the framework for a very particular type of client care. The article then goes on to examine - by using research on solicitors attitudes to the ‘meaning’ of the concept of parental responsibility - how practitioners cope with the tensions inherent in modern family legislation. It concludes that solicitors in practice convey policy messages rather than clear messages about legal rights and remedies.

Sexual harassment litigation may be thwarted by judges failing to address the acts in question from the perspective of the victim, thus legitimising behaviour acceptable to men but unacceptable to women. This paper shows how this problem may be overcome by adopting a ‘reasonable woman’ standard to decide if: (i) objectively, the acts in question constitute harassment; and (ii) subjectively, whether the victim suffered injury. Using US case law the paper shows how the reasonable woman standard, which has been accepted in some courts, can allow women's perspectives to be heard. The paper suggests that a reasonable woman standard should be adopted in UK tort law, specifically in litigation under the Sex Discrimination Act, but also for litigation under trespass torts and under the Protection from Harassment Act. Doctrinally, the proposed standard fits within the fabric of tort la; and does not challenge the principle of corrective justice. From a feminist perspective, the reasonable woman standard can successfully redirect tort law to address gender-specific harms.

The purpose of this article is to examine whether legal culture has an influence on the implementation of EC law in member states by means of one case study; the failure of the French legal community to recognise and apply a prohibition against indirect as well as direct discrimination, which is well established in EC legislation and case law. It is suggested that legal cultural factors may have some role to play. The focus of French legal culture on the importance of legal certainty has contributed to an emphasis on a formal concept of equality within the law, to which the concept of indirect discrimination is not suited. The paradoxical role of the French judge, who is given very little power in theory and who is therefore able to take the inevitable policy decisions behind the cloak of judicial anonymity, means that she is able to avoid the obligation placed on her by EC law to implement a prohibition on indirect sex discrimination.