El Derecho, Forthcoming
17 Pages Posted: 23 Oct 2010
Date Written: October 22, 2010
This paper in Spanish compares United States and Argentinian judicial standing requirements for groups. Both countries have developed two strands of group standing: organizational and associational. Under the former, less controversial type, groups can sue on their own behalf; under the latter, on behalf of one or more members. The more controversial form seeks to address certain collective action problems that frustrate participation by those who suffer diffuse injury in both legal systems. United States and Argentinian doctrine track each other in large part.
In one fundamental respect, however, United States associational standing is more restrictive than its Argentinian counterpart. American doctrine requires that at least one member of the organization have suffered an injury germane to the association’s interests before the organization can sue to vindicate that interest or that, at the least, those injured have some voice within the organization. Argentinian law does not. In many cases, of course, this difference does not matter. American organizations can in many contexts easily identify and assert injuries suffered by their members. In some cases, however, it does matter. When it does, the difference reflects less a formal concern with whether “interests” or “injuries” should count than a practical concern with organizational governance. By requiring injury to a member or voice from one affected, United States law ensures to some degree that the interests of those affected by a decision to review administrative action will be heard within the organization when it is making that decision. Argentinian law, by contrast, allows an organization to sue to vindicate the interests it was designed to pursue without such “representation.”
Notes: Downloadable document is in Spanish.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Ortiz, Daniel R. and Azzarri, Juan Cruz, Associational Standing: A Comparison between the American and Argentinian Systems (October 22, 2010). El Derecho, Forthcoming; Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2010-33. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1695958