ABSTRACT
This chapter provides an analysis of proportionality and suggested its advantages for dealing with situations of moral disagreement and conflicts of rights, particularly regarding disputes about religious freedom and non-discrimination. The first question under a proportionality test is whether there was a legitimate aim in infringing the right. The second part of the proportionality test is that of rational connection or suitability. The no less restrictive means test is therefore an important part of the proportionality test, but it should be distinguished in purpose from the final balancing test. The balancing stage is usually the most important part of the proportionality test and refers to a precise mechanism for resolving conflicts of rights. One of the primary advantages of proportionality is that it is context-specific and fact-specific. The chapter concludes with a short description of whether and how proportionality is used in the Canadian, English and US legal systems.
