Legal standing or locus standi

"Legal standing" or locus standi calls for more than just a generalized grievance.[1] The concept has been defined as a personal and substantial interest in the case such that the party has sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result of the governmental act that is being challenged.[2] The gist of the question of standing is whether a party alleges such personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the court depends for illumination of difficult constitutional questions.[3]A party challenging the constitutionality of a law, act, or statute must show “not only that the law is invalid, but also that he has sustained or is in immediate, or imminent danger of sustaining some direct injury as a result of its enforcement, and not merely that he suffers thereby in some indefinite way.” It must be shown that he has been, or is about to be, denied some right or privilege to which he is lawfully entitled, or that he is about to be subjected to some burdens or penalties by reason of the statute complained of.[4]
[1] Chamber of Real Estate and Builders Ass’ns, Inc. v. Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC), et al., 638 Phil. 542, 554 (2010).

[2] Public Interest Center, Inc. v. Judge Roxas, 542 Phil. 443, 456 (2007).

[3] Id. at 456.

[4] Disomangcop v. Sec. Datumanong, 486 Phil. 398, 425-426 (2004).