Skip to main content

Launch of the Next 100 Years of Women Lawyers in NSW

Wednesday, 2 July 2025
Parliament House, Macquarie Street, Sydney
Her Excellency the Honourable Margaret Beazley AC KC, Governor of New South Wales

Bujari gamarruwa

Diyn Babana Gamarada Gadigal Ngura

I greet you in the language of the Gadigal of the Eora Nation, the Traditional Owners of these lands and waterways. I pay my respect to their Elders, past, present and future.

Thank you, Professor Zou for your kind invitation to this evening’s event launching the ‘Next100 Years of Women Lawyers in New South Wales’.

Acknowledgements:

  • Chief Justice,
  • Attorney General, Minister Houssos
  • Distinguished guests, all

2018 marked a hundred years since women were granted the right to practice law in New South Wales.

Last year marked 100 years since the first woman was admitted as a solicitor in our State. Marie Byles completed a Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Laws at Sydney University, graduating in 1924 and was admitted as a solicitor in June[1] of that same year.[2] Sybil Morrison also graduated in 1924 and was admitted as a barrister 4 days earlier.

Forty-five years later, the renowned legal historian, John Bennett in A history of the New South Wales Bar mentioned women barristers in just 3 paragraphs. By that time10 women were in practice at the Bar.[3]  and  each had an important story to tell.

Fifteen years after that, taking us to 60 years after Marie Byles’ admission, John Bennett, in his 1984 A History of Solicitors in New South Wales, devoted less than four pages to women solicitors. By 1982, ‘there were 816 female practising solicitors comprising 12% of the solicitor’s branch of the profession.  By 1986, 628 more women held practising certificates taking the number to ‘1,444.,’[4]

The New South Wales Government distilled this important history even further: in its 1976 inquiry into the legal profession.  In the 625 page final report, there was a 3 line reference to women under the heading “Age and Sex of Lawyers”.

This paucity of attention was, if I can put it diplomatically, a form of disrespect and perpetuated the invisibility, and the myth, of the inconsequentiality of women’s achievements and contributions.

This scarcity of historical reference may simply have been due to largely unreformed attitudes, notwithstanding that the University of Sydney had accepted women in in 1881.

An example of such attitudes appeared in an early Bulletin article where the author wrote: “Higher education for women is a farce… a girl who had received a higher education is generally a prig or a poseur”. [5] We know that the Deans of Law and Medicine were imbued with similar attitudes.

So too it seemed were some of Marie Byles’ fellow students. She recalled in her autobiography how, whenever a reference was made during a lecture to the textbook on Bills of Exchange, written by Justice Byles, a distant relative, “the class stamped their feet furiously”.[6]

However, the media treatment of Marie Byles’ admission as a solicitor was respectfully brief and factual possibly to the respect given to women for the role women, they played during the First World War their contribution vital to the Australian economy and the wider war effort and was a driver behind the passage of the 1918 Act.

With a polite headline ‘First Lady Solicitor’ The Sun, on 7 May 1924, reported that Marie Byles had passed her exams and intended to practice in the city. [7] The article also reported that Ada Evans had been ‘the first lady barrister’, admitted 4 years earlier but had not donned the wig and gown.

We are all familiar with Ada Evans’ story – kept out of the profession so long she felt that it was too late for her to practice.

The law remained unwelcoming. Fifteen years after Marie Byles’ admission, only nine more female solicitors, and only two admitted barristers, (including Ada Evans) were enrolled.

Surprising to us these days, the Solicitors and Barristers Admission board courses proved an obstacle as law firms and senior barristers were reluctant to provide articles of clerkship or pupillage to women.[8] When Marie Byles approached one firm, the senior partner said, “A girl, thank heavens I shall soon be [retired].” Finally, to secure her articles of clerkship she was required to pay double the usual amount paid by her male colleagues. . [9] 

Three other interesting aspects of these early days was that like their male counterparts. they all came from professional families, this being a time when educational opportunities for women, especially in the lower socio-economic sphere were limited and contacts were everything; nearly all had strong, independent mothers who encouraged their studies and careers; and nearly all were openly activists.

Marie Byles, for example, challenged the White Australian Policy; she deplored the custom of taking a husband’s name upon marriage, which she saw as a e vestige of the times when legally women were effectively considered their husband’s chattel.

Jollie Smith focussed on the disadvantages of industrial workers.

Sybil Morrison was concerned with female inequality on divorce.  Importantly, in those early years her work came almost exclusively from Marie Byles and Jollie Smith – the important story of women supporting women. However, her very first brief was a Testators’ Family Maintenance matter directly from the Attorney General, who had steered the 1918 legislation through Parliament.[10]  

Others stepped up. Marie Byles was about to give up trying to find articles employment and undertake a Masters Degree. Dean of the Law School Sir John Peden, grandfather of Justice Elisabeth Peden, advocated for her at the law firm Henry Davis. She became Managing Clerk at the firm and 5 years later, in 1929, opened the very first suburban legal practice in the foyer of the Duke of York Theatre in Eastwood with a loan of £40 from her mother, along with some furniture.[11]

Initially needing to supplement her income as a journalist, Marie built up a successful practice including a second office in central Sydney.

Nerida Cohen, admitted to the Bar on 25 July 1935, was one of four female barristers admitted between 1933 and 1939, and the only one to establish a practice.[12] After much difficulty finding a pupil master Mr WB Simpson agreed. In her first court appearance as his junior, he announced, as was customary, that he appeared “with my learned friend”.  Justice Maxwell quipped: “I beg your pardon Mr Simpson did you say you appear with your girlfriend?”.[13]

Marie Byles retired from legal practice in 1970.

I was called to the Bar five years later. Despite the passage of some 50 years, my experience upon entering the profession in 1975 bore most of the same hallmarks:

  • difficulty getting chambers;
  • being told to do family law because women weren’t capable or suitable of doing anything else;
  • challenged as to why you were there;
  • unable to obtain a bank loan without a male guarantor;
  • vetoed by my Pupil-Master – he said he would speak for my ability, but he couldn’t have a woman on the floor. I might form a relationship with someone – as if I would be the culprit.

I will tell just one story which reads almost line by line with one of Sybil Morrison’s stories – separated by some 70 years.

The Sun on 25 October 1925, reported that Sybil Morrison had received an invitation to the Governor’s levee.[14] The article said: ‘All members of the higher legal profession are ‘gentlemen’ by Act of Parliament.   And all ladies too.  Mrs S Morrison BA LLB barrister at law is today a ‘gentleman for the purpose of the Governor-General’s Levee.  She received a communication addressed:  Mrs Sibyl Morrison BA LLB Esq.’[15] 

In 1992, I received a letter from a would-be author of a miscellany of law. It was addressed to “Justice” and commenced “Dear Sir” and asked if I had any anecdotes I might care to share for his tome.  I responded:

‘Dear Mr X,  

Thank you for your letter…beginning ‘Dear Sir.’ Perhaps your first anecdote could come from you. My first name is Margaret.’

He responded:

‘Dear Justice,

Perhaps you could share some anecdotes relating to your femininity!’ 

Tonight is not my story; it is the story of all of us and, in particular, those early women in the profession who made it possible for those who followed. In this part of the story, it is important that personal successes not obscure the legal pyramid.   As of 2023[16], 29% of women in private practice were principals. There continues to be a pay disparity.[17]   7% of the 2466 barristers and 15.8% of the almost 400 senior counsel, are women.  Happily, Judicial appointments are on the ‘up’ with 43.3% the 293 judicial officers being women.

Finally, I ask, why do we celebrate this centenary. Of course, we tend to celebrate centenaries.  That however, I suggest is not enough.  Let me proffer just three reasons why this is so.

First, those early female lawyers not only had the usual challenges of commencing in a new profession. They had to fight to be able to practice. We owe them a debt of gratitude. 

Secondly, law today is a wonderful place for women, and this centenary reminds us of the importance of collegiality and the need to support women professionally each other. The law is an exacting profession for all practitioners, but I continue to hear of the additional challenges for women. We must not be blind to them. 

This is confirmed in the 2023 report, ‘Designing Gender Equality into the Future of Law’: sexual harassment, bullying, access to prestigious cases and projects, treatment from clients, promotion opportunities, and support for work-life balance’.[18]    The report also highlighted the danger of new technologies in areas of legal work where there was a concentration of women.[19]  

Thirdly, the positive contribution women make needs to be recognised. Research across all professions and occupations shows that women in leadership roles increases productivity, enhances collaboration, and improves overall fairness.[20]  Accepting the generality of those findings, the contribution of women must not be considered as merely an adjunct in a male profession. 

For 100 years, women have been ‘go to’ experts in fields as diverse as administrative law, criminal law, family law, industrial law, tax, indeed, all of them many others. It is important as practitioners to have and to maintain visibility.  And of course, professionalism is the core ingredient to success.   That has been the case over the last 100 years and will continue to be so for the next 100 years.

Tonight, the Next 100 Years project launch showcases the continued research on women and the law by five law schools here in New South Wales – the University of Sydney, UNSW, Macquarie, UTS and Western Sydney.

This important project, co-ordinated by Professor Zou, in conjunction with the Women Lawyers’ Association NSW, the NSW Law Society, the NSW Bar Association and the Law Council of Australia, aims to achieve equality for women in law.

[1] Northern Star, ‘First Woman Solicitor’, 5 June 1924. The article noted that Marie Byles was one of 17 solicitors to be ‘added to the rolls by the Full Court on [Wednesday, 4 June 1924].’ See: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/93442930

[2] https://www.nationaltrust.org.au/blog/marie-byles/

[3] J O’Brien, ‘A History of Women in the Legal Profession in New South Wales’, (M.A. Pass, University of Sydney, April 1986), p55.

[4] J O’Brien, ‘A History of Women in the Legal Profession in New South Wales’, (M.A. Pass, University of Sydney, April 1986), p77.

[5] Joan M O’Brien, ‘A History of Women in the Legal Profession in New South Wales,’ Sydney University, April 1986 citing a reference to Margaret Mulvey “History of Women In Medicine,” RPA Magazine Special Centenary Edition, Winter 1982.

[6] Joan M O’Brien, ‘A History of Women in the Legal Profession in New South Wales,’ Sydney University, April 1986 p21.

[7] The Sun, ‘First Lady Solicitor’, 7 May 1924:  ‘Miss Marie B. Byles, B.A, LLB, of Beecroft, has just passed her legal examination entitling her to practice as a Solicitor of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, and she will be admitted shortly by the Full Court…It is the intention of Miss Byles to practice as an attorney and solicitor in the city.’ See: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/223395553

[8] Joan M O’Brien, ‘A History of Women in the Legal Profession in New South Wales,’  Sydney University, April 1986 p20.

[9] Joan M O’Brien, ‘A History of Women in the Legal Profession in New South Wales,’ Sydney University, April 1986 p24.

[10] Joan M O’Brien, ‘A History of Women in the Legal Profession in New South Wales,’ Sydney University, April 1986 p29-30.

[11] https://www.nationaltrust.org.au/blog/marie-byles/

[12] Joan M O’Brien, ‘A History of Women in the Legal Profession in New South Wales,’ Sydney University, April 1986 p37.

[13]Joan M O’Brien, ‘A History of Women in the Legal Profession in New South Wales,’ Sydney University, April 1986 p39.

[14] The Governor’s Levee being a celebration in honour of the Sovereign’s birthday. See for example: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/235781741/25490152

[15] https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/223930077

[16] The most recent NSW Law Society reporting: NSW Law Society 2023 Annual Profile of Solicitors

[17] A greater proportion of female solicitors reported earning less than $150,000 (51%), compared to male solicitors (43%). Nearly a third of males reported earning more than $200,000 (32%), compared to 23% of females. See NSW Law Society 2023 Annual Profile of Solicitors p7.

[18] Foley, M., Tapsell, A., Cooper, R., Lee, T., Lipton, B., Rutledge-Prior, S., and Vromen, A. (2023) Designing Gender Equality into the Future of Law: Final Report, University of Sydney Business School, and Australian National University. https://doi.org/10.25910/32vr-1n13 See also, Media Release from 5 October 2023 here

[19] Media Release from 5 October 2023 here “There’s a perception that technology is dividing the industry between lower-value, generalised ‘legal work’ that could be easily automated, and higher-value, tailored ‘legal advice’ – and there is a disproportionate concentration of women in practice areas and specialisations more likely to be affected.”

[20] https://www.apa.org/topics/women-girls/female-leaders-make-work-better

Back to Top