File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
  • Find via Find It@HKUL
Supplementary

Article: Public Welfare and The Judicial Over-Enforcement of Socio-Economic Rights in Hong Kong

TitlePublic Welfare and The Judicial Over-Enforcement of Socio-Economic Rights in Hong Kong
Authors
Issue Date2014
PublisherSweet & Maxwell Asia. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.hku.hk/law/hklj/
Citation
Hong Kong Law Journal, 2014, v. 44 n. 1, p. 41-54 How to Cite?
AbstractThis comment argues that the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) in Kong Yunming has erred insofar as it applied the proportionality analysis vis-à-vis any restriction placed on the Art 36 right to social welfare. Even if the CFA was right to apply the proportionality analysis, it is argued that there is a rational connection between the 7-year residence requirement and the Government’s aim of ensuring the sustainability of the welfare system by addressing the problems raised by the following issues: (a) immigration from the Mainland under the One-Way Permit scheme; (b) Hong Kong’s ageing population; and (c) the rise in Comprehensive Social Security Assistance Scheme expenditure. Finally, even if the impugned 7-year residence requirement was unconstitutional, the CFA should have issued a temporary suspension order, rather than restore the 1-year residence requirement.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/205918
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 0.215
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.101

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorYap, PJen_US
dc.contributor.authorWong, Ten_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-10-20T09:48:06Z-
dc.date.available2014-10-20T09:48:06Z-
dc.date.issued2014en_US
dc.identifier.citationHong Kong Law Journal, 2014, v. 44 n. 1, p. 41-54en_US
dc.identifier.issn0378-0600-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/205918-
dc.description.abstractThis comment argues that the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) in Kong Yunming has erred insofar as it applied the proportionality analysis vis-à-vis any restriction placed on the Art 36 right to social welfare. Even if the CFA was right to apply the proportionality analysis, it is argued that there is a rational connection between the 7-year residence requirement and the Government’s aim of ensuring the sustainability of the welfare system by addressing the problems raised by the following issues: (a) immigration from the Mainland under the One-Way Permit scheme; (b) Hong Kong’s ageing population; and (c) the rise in Comprehensive Social Security Assistance Scheme expenditure. Finally, even if the impugned 7-year residence requirement was unconstitutional, the CFA should have issued a temporary suspension order, rather than restore the 1-year residence requirement.-
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSweet & Maxwell Asia. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.hku.hk/law/hklj/-
dc.relation.ispartofHong Kong Law Journalen_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.titlePublic Welfare and The Judicial Over-Enforcement of Socio-Economic Rights in Hong Kongen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailYap, PJ: pjyap@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityYap, PJ=rp01274en_US
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.hkuros230782en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros230783-
dc.identifier.hkuros230780-
dc.identifier.volume44en_US
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage41en_US
dc.identifier.epage54en_US
dc.publisher.placeHong Kong-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats