Locus standi (Latin for "place of standing") is the threshold requirement that a litigant must satisfy before a court will hear the merits of their claim. The doctrine ensures that courts adjudicate concrete disputes rather than abstract grievances, and it operates in both domestic and international forums—though with significantly different thresholds.
In domestic law, standing rules vary by jurisdiction. U.S. federal courts apply the three-part test from Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992): the plaintiff must show (1) a concrete and particularized injury, (2) traceable to the defendant's conduct, and (3) redressable by judicial relief. English courts use a more flexible "sufficient interest" test under the Senior Courts Act 1981, which has permitted NGOs and pressure groups to bring judicial review claims. India has gone further still, developing public interest litigation (PIL) since the late 1970s, which relaxes standing to allow any public-spirited citizen to petition on behalf of disadvantaged groups.
In international law, standing is generally restricted to states. Under Article 34 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, "only states may be parties in cases before the Court." However, the ICJ has recognised expanded standing for erga omnes obligations—duties owed to the international community as a whole. In the 2022 provisional measures order in The Gambia v. Myanmar, the Court confirmed that any state party to the Genocide Convention may invoke another party's responsibility, even without being directly injured.
Standing is distinct from jurisdiction (the court's power to hear a type of case) and admissibility (whether the claim is properly framed). A claimant may have standing but still fail on jurisdictional grounds, or vice versa.
Key considerations for researchers:
- Direct vs. representative standing: whether a party sues for itself or on behalf of others
- Actio popularis: standing for any member of the public, generally rejected in international law
- Third-party intervention: a separate procedural route under ICJ Statute Articles 62–63
Example
In 2019, the UK Supreme Court in *R (Miller) v The Prime Minister* accepted that Gina Miller had locus standi to challenge Boris Johnson's prorogation of Parliament as unlawful.
Frequently asked questions
Locus standi concerns whether a particular claimant is entitled to bring a case, while jurisdiction concerns whether the court has authority to hear that type of dispute at all. A court may have jurisdiction over a matter yet still dismiss it for lack of standing.
Keep learning