PLAINTIFF V. DEFENDANT * Reason 3.

GR — 000000
DD/MM/YYYY [II] On the issue of locus standi.
* Supreme Court said: Petitioners had
——— standing to file this present case because:
* Reason 1;
Topics: Judicial review; locus standi * Reason 2; and
Laws involved: EO 0000; EO 0001 * Reason 3.

——— ULTIMATELY, therefore, [conclusion here].

SUMMARY
* In this case, petitioner filed a case against ———
defendant claiming that defendant, in
implementing EO 0001 and EO 0000, ESSENCE OF THE CASE
infringed upon the rights of Filipinos to free * This part is optional (if you feel like the
speech, as enshrined in the Constitution. HELD/RATIO part can still be discussed
further).
FACTS * You can put here your learnings/personal
* Fact 1 — Description of fact 1 understanding of the case/more concepts
* Supporting details from Supreme Court (linking the case to the
* Supporting details topics talked about in our Consti class).
* Supporting details * For example, here you can discuss more on
judicial review and state its requisites or the
* Fact 2 — Description of fact 2 requisites of locus standi.
* Supporting details
* Supporting details
* Supporting details

* PETITIONERS’ ARGUMENTS:
* Contention 1
* Contention 2
* Contention 3
* RESPONDENTS’ ARGUMENTS:
* Response 1
* Response 2
* Response 3

ISSUE/S
I. Whether or not defendant’s act is subject to
judicial review — YES
II. Whether or not petitioners had locus standi to
file this case — YES

HELD/RATIO:

[I] On the issue of judicial review.

* Supreme Court said: Defendant’s act of
implementing the assailed EO’s are subject
to judicial review because:
* Reason 1;
* Reason 2; and