Sites blind to usability flaws

A lawsuit in the US has highlighted the need for UK firms to comply with disabilities legislation when building Web sites

A blind man who uses screen-reader technology to convert Web site content into speech is suing two companies in America because its site is incompatible with his software. Although no similar cases have been brought in the UK, companies here have been advised that they are bound by similar laws.

Robert Gumson has filed a lawsuit against Southwest and American Airlines. The case has been filed under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Gumson's claim relies on an untested theory that the act's provisions for accessibility apply to Internet Web sites just as they do to bricks-and-mortar facilities.

It is not the first case of this kind. In 1999, the National Federation of the Blind sued America Online, alleging its services were inaccessible to blind users and therefore violated the law. A year later AOL agreed to make all of its sites compatible with screen-reader technology and the case was settled. In a separate case, a complaint to the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission said that the failure of the Olympics committee to set up a Web site that was accessible to blind people was a breach of the Australian Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

Though the law in this area has not yet been tested in a UK court, Julie Howell, campaign officer at the Royal National Institute of the Blind (RNIB), said, "In the UK it is much clearer that Web sites are covered by our disability discrimination law. Since October 1999, when section 21 of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1995 came into force, there's been a duty on service providers to make their services accessible to people with disabilities. We know that this covers the Web because explicit reference is made to Web sites in the DDA Code of Practice." But a precedent would be needed in case law to confirm Howell's argument.

Howell added, "The RNIB is prepared to support disabled individuals who have a case that we feel demonstrates that discrimination is taking place."

Rupert Battcock, a lawyer with Nabarro Nathanson, said site designers and operators would probably be complying with the law if they could show that they had taken "reasonable steps" to ensure accessibility. "It may sometimes be valid, for instance, for Web providers to state that they cannot afford to do too much in the way of compliance. But services like (the Bobby test for Web site accessibility) are not necessarily that expensive," he added. The Bobby test is an automated test for design features that may cause problems for some visitors. It was developed by the Centre for Applied Special Technology but is now managed by Web site management solutions company Watchfire.

Have your say: contact IT Week