In this article
Hysan Development v Town Planning Board
HK Court of Final Appeal, 26-Sep-2016
In a major development in HK jurisprudence, the CFA adds a 4th leg to the proportionality test when restricting a constitutional right. If the restriction pursues a legitimate aim, is rationally connected to that aim and is no more than is necessary to achieve that aim, then the 4th leg is whether a reasonable balance has been struck between the societal benefits of the restriction and the infringement of the constitutional right, asking in particular whether it results in an unacceptably harsh burden on the individual. Kudos to Hysan for bringing this case.