Nowadays many postcolonial societies endorse multilingualism. But Leung (2019) observes how, in the legal process, ostensible linguistic equality may disguise substantive inequality. She characterises this as a situation of 'shallow equality'. This article investigates the balance between substantive and shallow equality in the Supreme Court of the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu. Vanuatu is highly multilingual, with over 100 languages. Although the Constitution officially supports all languages, the court ultimately demands competence in English. To investigate this tension I analyse observational and interview data from the field, using a theoretical framework which incorporates language planning, ideologies and practices (Spolsky 2004; 2012; 2021). Results confirm Leung's thesis. The Court does support multilingualism - particularly the local lingua franca, Bislama - but a 'shallow equality' persists. Nevertheless, constitutional protections lead to more positive outcomes than would otherwise eventuate. Also, modest practical measures could be implemented to improve substantive linguistic equality.