Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Justiciability
 | The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and the United Kingdom and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (July 2024) |
| Judicial interpretation |
|---|
| Forms |
| General rules of interpretation |
| General theories of interpretation |
|
| Administrative law |
|---|
| General principles |
| Grounds for judicial review |
|
Administrative law in common law jurisdictions |
|
Administrative law in civil law jurisdictions |
| Related topics |
Justiciability concerns the limits upon legal issues over which a court can exercise its judicial authority.[1] It includes, but is not limited to, the legal concept of standing, which is used to determine if the party bringing the suit is a party appropriate to establishing whether an actual adversarial issue exists.[2] Essentially, justiciability seeks to address whether a court possesses the ability to provide adequate resolution of the dispute; where a court believes that it cannot offer such a final determination, the matter is not justiciable.
- ^ May, Christopher N.; Ides, Allan (2007). Constitutional Law: National Power and Federalism (4th ed.). New York, NY: Aspen Publishers. pp. 97–99.
- ^ Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83, 100 (1968) ("[W]hen standing is placed in issue in a case, the question is whether the person whose standing is challenged is a proper party to request an adjudication of a particular issue, and not whether the issue itself is justiciable.").
Previous Page Next Page
