In this paper we introduce a framework for developing children’s legal capability. This is the outcome of an extended period of interdisciplinary research, reflection, and discussion to explore the question of ‘what does a legally capable child look like?’. Initially this question was explored within the context of adult-focused legal capability literature, and we explain how the framework we propose in this paper has been informed by this scholarship. However, we go on to demonstrate how our work breaks new ground not only because of its focus on children, but because we radically reconceptualise legal capability, drawing on a range of interdisciplinary theories. Within the framework we introduce the concept of ‘baseline’ legal capability, and we argue that this addresses the conundrum we identify in the literature, where legal capability is conceptualised as something which those most in need of effective public legal education can never achieve. More generally, we demonstrate how the framework turns traditional ideas about legal education upside down as we ‘decentre’ the law and legal institutions, and instead place the learner at its core.

Individuals routinely engage in instrumental transactional legal behavior, from generating tax returns to signing leases to negotiating employment terms. While some individuals undertake these activities equipped with the skills, knowledge, and capacity to behave strategically, others do not. In this article, we introduce the concept of legal actuation to describe this legal behavior and theorize its role as a source of inequality under the law. Using estate planning as an empirical example, we consider how variation in legal actuation may serve to reproduce economic inequalities and investigate the role of legal socialization, knowledge, and capability as mechanisms of advantage. In doing so, we draw attention to an understudied dimension of everyday legal behavior that has important implications for equal justice and the relationship between law and inequality.