Sarah P.L. Wolffe (The Hon Lady Wolffe)
Nominated Fellow (by the University of Edinburgh’s Law School)
Home institution: University of Edinburgh, Honorary Professor, The Law School
Sarah does not come from a conventional academic career, having been a judge in the Court of Session (Scotland’s Supreme Courts), sitting principally as a commercial judge. Prior to her judicial career, Sarah was an Advocate and a Queen’s Counsel at the Scots bar, specialising in commercial and public law.
Her other current positions include: General Council Assessor, on the Court of Edinburgh University; Senior Legal Chair, Financial Reporting Council; Commissioner, the Marshall Aid Commemoration Commission; President, The Stair Society -; President, The Court of the Scottish Arbitration Centre; and Member of the Executive of CERIL (Conference on European Restructuring and Insolvency Law).
Sarah has always been interested in legal education and equality issues. She is a long-time supporter of the Edinburgh Foundation for Women in Law (EFWiL) and is Co-Chair of an ongoing joint project of EFWiL and the RSE examining the persistent underrepresentation of women (among other cohorts) in the senior levels of the Scottish legal profession as a case study, and whose proposals will be applied to other professions.
Project title: Exploring the underrepresentation of women in the senior judiciary of Scotland and its impacts on the rule of law and judicial independence
The impetus for my project was my research for a chapter in Scotland and the Court of Justice of the European Union: An Enduring Legacy? (Radboud University Press, 2026), examining the contribution made by women to the senior judiciary of the EU and Scotland. Key findings, to be further explored, include: the dearth of data and the absence of scholarly study of the gender disparity of Scotland’s most senior courts, the absence of any critical analysis of the reasons for the persistent underrepresentation of woman (and other cohorts), or proposals to address this.
Several methodologies will be deployed, including
(A) empirical/quantitative: (i) to establish and analyse the evidence-base of the gender (and other) underrepresentation among the senior judiciary in Scotland; (ii) and experiential in the form of interviews and/or a survey of the experience of women in navigating the processes leading to senior judicial appointment;
(B) socio-legal literature review: of the concept of ‘merit’ -specifically as a gendered concept, and relating this to the use of the merit criterion in similar appointment processes, as well as those by JABS (the Judicial Appoint Board for Scotlan); and
(C) comparative/ doctrinal: testing and comparing the data and analysis with the position, processes and experience in England which, notwithstanding having an identical statutory criterion and ostensibly similar appointment processes, has achieved a demonstrably better gender-balanced and diverse senior judiciary.
The key outcomes will be the identification and formulation of proposals to address the challenges explored.