← All Authorities
Hong Kong Leading Case convention rightsproportionalityarticle 39 iccpr incorporationarticle 27 fundamental rights

Kong Yun Ming v Director of Social Welfare

(2013) 16 HKCFAR 950
JurisdictionHong Kong
CourtHK Court of Final Appeal
Year2013
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Seven-year residence requirement for CSSA held unconstitutional; CFA applied four-step Hysan proportionality test to socio-economic rights under the Basic Law and Bill of Rights.

Key Principle

seven-year residence requirement for CSSA challenged; four-step proportionality test (Hysan) applied to socio-economic rights

Area of Law

constitutional

Related Cases

NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (2023) 97 ALJR 1005

Indefinite administrative detention of a non-citizen with no real prospect of removal is unlawful as punitive and contrary to Ch III of the Australian Constitution, overruling Al-Kateb v Godwin.

Farm Transparency International v NSW (2022) 276 CLR 81

HCA upheld NSW ag-gag laws as valid notwithstanding a burden on the implied freedom of political communication, applying the structured proportionality test.

Palmer v Western Australia (2021) 272 CLR 505

HCA upheld WA COVID-19 border closure legislation as valid under s.92, finding restrictions on interstate movement were reasonably necessary and proportionate to protect public health.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Kong Yun Ming v Director of Social Welfare and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Kong Yun Ming v Director of So...