Law Reformer
Photo: Linda Nylind | The Guardian
Changing the Law
Dr Charlotte Proudman has been instrumental in major legal reforms designed to strengthen protections for women and girls. She played a key role in campaigns that led to the criminalisation of forced marriage, child marriage, virginity testing and hymenoplasty, and was at the forefront of introducing Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders, a novel legal remedy to safeguard those at risk. Working alongside organisations including Girls Not Brides, she advocated successfully to raise the legal age of marriage from 16 to 18.
As a barrister, she has also contributed to drafting legislation and most recently worked with activists to make public sexual harassment a criminal offence.
Founder of Right to Equality
Charlotte founded Right to Equality, a not-for-profit organisation that uses the law to protect and advance the rights of women and girls. The organisation has a strong track record of successful legal and policy reform, contributing to the repeal of the presumption of parental involvement in the family courts, the criminalisation of public sexual harassment, the criminalisation of hymenoplasty and child marriage, and the decriminalisation of abortion. Through strategic advocacy and parliamentary engagement, it has helped shift legal frameworks toward evidence-based, survivor-centred justice.
Dr Charlotte Proudman addressing Parliament at an event hosted by Right to Equality
[Charlotte] has worked with many survivors and victims of domestic abuse, taking their cases to appeal and being successful when she does so, which shows that there is a problem. Her dedication to those mothers has brought hope to many women and survivors of domestic abuse, but it should not take going to appeal or having a barrister take a case to appeal, or overturning those cases, to expose the problems in the family courts
Anna McMorrin
Labour MP
Charlotte Proudman specialises in representing women and children in family courts and her cases have helped define gaslighting and coercive control.
Woman and Diversity in Law Awards
Woman of the Year 2025
Charlotte represents survivors of rape, domestic abuse and controlling behaviour in the family courts whilst also challenging misconceptions across the sector. She uses her knowledge and experience of the justice system to advocate for legal change and protect victims.
Legal 500
Leading Junior Barrister
Dr Charlotte Proudman with (from left to right) Apsana Begum MP, Marie Tidball MP, Claire Throssell MBE, Dr Adrienne Barnett, and Claire Waxman OBE in Parliament
Ongoing Advocacy
Right to Equality continues to lead national efforts to reform the family justice system. The organisation campaigns to introduce a Family Justice Bill, challenge judicial bias, end unjust child removal in the family courts, reform Hague Convention proceedings, and strengthen the legal response to child sexual abuse allegations. Its work combines legal strategy with public accountability to drive structural change.
The Garrick Club
​
​Beyond legislative reform, Charlotte has also confronted entrenched gender discrimination within powerful institutions. In 2024, she was instrumental in a high-profile campaign exposing judicial membership of the all-male Garrick Club, drawing national attention to exclusionary practices and the marginalisation of women within elite legal circles. The campaign led to judges resigning their membership, the Club opening its doors to women, and Charlotte securing the recusal of two judges on grounds of potential bias arising from their affiliation. It reflected her broader commitment to challenging structural inequality wherever it persists.
Photo: Stefan Rousseau | PA
Photo: Stefan Rousseau | PA
Bar Standards Board
​
​Charlotte is bringing a sex discrimination claim against the Bar Standards Board following its failed (almost) three-year prosecution of her for criticising a judge’s “boys’ club” approach to domestic abuse. The disciplinary case was ‘thrown out’ with no findings against her. Charlotte now challenges the lawfulness of the regulator’s decision to pursue her, arguing that she was targeted for speaking out about misogyny within the profession while male barristers who subjected her to gendered abuse online were afforded “free speech” protections. The case raises significant questions about equality, regulatory accountability and freedom of expression at the Bar.