Practice question
For a non-class claim relying on the repetition-evading-review rationale discussed in Marquez, a short-lived measure has expired but there is no reasonable expectation the same complaining party will face it again. Which analysis is best?
- Short duration alone always satisfies both elements
- The same-party recurrence element is missing, though a different properly established mootness ground would require separate analysis
- Expiry itself proves future recurrence
- Any stranger’s hypothetical concern automatically supplies recurrence
- The claimant wins because review took time
Legal references
- Marquez v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 244274, September 3, 2019, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2019/sep2019/gr_244274_2019.html; Part I.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.