You received a demand over your website’s accessibility: what the law really requires of a business

Service page: Defense against a motion to certify a class action.

A demand letter about website accessibility looks threatening on purpose: it quotes regulations, names an amount and sets an ultimatum. Most of what it says is correct, but three central things are almost always missing from it — who must comply at all, when a deviation becomes a breach, and which defenses the law sets out expressly. This is what the regulations and the law themselves say, in the order that matters to a business owner who received a demand.

First question: does your business have to comply at all

The duty to make websites accessible is set in Article C of Chapter E of the Equal Rights for Persons with Disabilities (Service Accessibility Adjustments) Regulations, 5773-2013 (תקנות שוויון זכויות לאנשים עם מוגבלות (התאמות נגישות לשירות), התשע״ג-2013), which were made under section 19L of the Equal Rights for Persons with Disabilities Law, 5758-1998. Before any other question, you need to check whether you are a “person required to comply” for the purpose of this Article at all — and regulation 35F takes more businesses out of it than people tend to think.

The exemptions in regulation 35F are the point that most business owners do not know, and most of them are based on average turnover — the average of the turnovers in the last three tax years in which turnover was not zero:

• An exempt dealer, or anyone whose average annual turnover does not exceed NIS 100,000 — exempt from the accessibility adjustments in this Article (regulation 35F(g)).
• Average turnover of up to NIS 1,000,000 — exempt for a website or application that the business began operating before the regulations came into force, provided that the ways of contacting it to receive service are published in an accessible way. The exemption is valid for three years and can be renewed (regulation 35F(i)). This exemption does not apply to a new website.
• A technological limitation — a service accessibility licensed professional may, on the basis of a professional’s opinion, grant an exemption from a specific adjustment that the platform does not allow. The exemption is valid for up to three years and can be renewed, and it requires alternative accessibility and publishing the exemption in the accessibility statement.
• Social media infrastructure that does not allow the adjustment — exempt for that adjustment only.
• A closed service whose entry is limited to people registered in advance, with up to 500 participants registered at the same time — exempt, unless a person with a disability asked for an adjustment.
• Advertisements — the Article does not apply to them, provided there is an accessible alternative for the information about the service that appears in the advertisement.

Note what is not there: the regulations have no threshold based on the number of employees. The claim that the duty applies only to businesses with more than 25 employees does not appear in them. The temporary exemption that applied to a turnover of up to NIS 300,000 ended on 26 October 2020.

For video there is a separate threshold: the duty to caption recorded video content applies to a public authority, or to a business required to comply whose average turnover exceeds NIS 5 million and which edits or produces the content.

What exactly the accessibility regulations require — and from what date

If the business must comply, this is the scope of the duty — and these are the dates from which it applies.

This is where the most common confusion in this area lies. The regulations themselves are from 2013, so people often write that the duty to make websites accessible has applied “since 2014”. That is not accurate. Amending regulations from 2016 expressly provided that the person required to comply shall complete the adjustments by 6 Heshvan 5778 — 26 October 2017; and on that same day the updated text of Article C (regulations 35A–35F), which is the law that applies today, also came into force. The date 25 October 2014 appears in the regulations in one narrow context only: regulation 35A(b) provides that a person required to comply that is not a public authority, and that made adjustments at level A by that date, is treated as having met the provisions of the regulation.

Regulation 35A(a) sets the substantive requirement: a person required to comply shall provide accessibility adjustments in an internet service according to the internet accessibility standard — Israeli Standard IS 5568, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines — at level AA, except for applications (apps) and time-based media, which have separate rules. “Internet service” is defined broadly: content in any form — text, documents, images or video — presented on websites, in documents or in applications, intended to provide the user with a public service or information about it.

Alongside the website itself: a document prepared from 26 October 2017 onward and uploaded to the website — for example a PDF file — must be accessible under the provisions of the standard that deal with documents; and an online form used to receive service, as well as an explanatory document about it prepared after 26 October 2015, must meet the requirement even if they were prepared before that date.

The defense most defendants do not know about: notice and 60 days (regulation 35A(d))

This is the most important practical provision in the Article, and it is in regulation 35A(d):

What this means: a website that does not meet the standard does not, in itself, breach the accessibility provisions — until a demand to correct it was sent and the person required to comply did not correct it within 60 days. So documenting the date the request was received, the steps taken and the alternative adjustments made in the meantime is the first line of defense in any proceeding.

The first two weeks after a demand letter — the order of steps

What decides the outcome is not the wording of the reply but what was done and documented within the window in regulation 35A(d). The order of steps:

• Document the day the demand was received — the 60 days are counted from it, and the defense will rest on it. Keep the envelope, the email or the delivery confirmation.
• Check whether you are a “person required to comply” at all — average turnover in the last three tax years against the NIS 100,000 threshold, and if the website was set up before the regulations came into force — also against the NIS 1,000,000 threshold.
• Order a check against the standard — not only an “automatic scan”: keyboard navigation, screen reader, contrast, forms. The report is the evidence that you started to act.
• Correct, and document each correction with a date — a handling log is what turns regulation 35A(d) from a provision into a defense.
• Make alternative adjustments right away — regulation 35A(d)(2) requires this “as soon as possible from the date the notice was received”, without waiting for the correction to be completed. In practice: an accessible contact channel and a human response.
• Publish or update an accessibility statement under regulation 35E, with contact details for reporting a defect.
• Consider sending a query to the Commission — section 19YY(c)(3) provides that a query to the Commission a reasonable time before the claim is filed rules out an award of compensation without proof of damage for breach of the regulations. This is a tactical consideration that should be weighed against the circumstances.
• Do not ignore it — a breach arises precisely when the demand is received and not handled. Not responding is what turns a non-compliant website into a cause of action.

The accessibility statement, other people’s content and apps

Regulation 35E requires stating, in a prominent place on the website, an accessibility statement following the guidelines in the standard, which includes information about the accessibility adjustments made, the details of the accessibility coordinator and how to contact them — if the person required to comply must appoint one — and details for contacting the business to report a lack of accessibility or to request an adjustment.

Regulation 35B deals with content that other parties provided or upload to the website: the person required to comply is not responsible for making adjustments in content they do not edit or produce, but they must provide accessible infrastructure — for example a field for describing an image. Regulation 35C deals with applications: they will meet a dedicated Israeli standard if one exists, and if not — the criteria of the internet accessibility standard as far as they are relevant, on at least two common operating systems. A person required to comply who operates an identical service on an adapted and accessible website is exempt from making the app accessible, provided they publish an accessible link to the website in it.

The numbers: the compensation, the class action route, and the defenses

Section 19YY(a) of the Equal Rights for Persons with Disabilities Law provides that an act or omission contrary to the provisions of Chapter E1 — including the regulations made under section 19L — is a civil wrong, and the provisions of the Torts Ordinance [New Version] apply to it. Section 19YY(b) adds what makes this area an arena for claims: the court may award compensation without proof of damage, up to an amount that the law states as NIS 50,000. Under section 19YY(f), the amount is updated once a year according to the consumer price index relative to the February 2005 index; the law does not state the date of the update, so the amount in force at the relevant date has to be checked. For illustration only: linking NIS 50,000 from the February 2005 index to the August 2026 index gives about NIS 74,720 according to Central Bureau of Statistics data. And note the word “may” — this is a ceiling left to discretion, not an amount owed. This is the amount that appears in the heading of every demand, so it is worth knowing that it is a conditional ceiling and not a tariff — and what exactly rules it out. The procedural aspect is explained in Class actions and consumer claims.

The class action route is expressly open: item 9(1) of the Second Schedule to the Class Actions Law, 5766-2006 (חוק תובענות ייצוגיות, התשס״ו-2006) allows a motion to certify a class action based on a cause of action under Chapters D, E or E1 of the Equal Rights Law. In addition, section 19AAA gives the Commission for Equal Rights of Persons with Disabilities and an organization that promotes the rights of persons with disabilities standing to file a claim, and section 19ZZ imposes personal liability on an officer of a corporation who did not prove that the civil wrong was committed without their knowledge and that they took reasonable measures to prevent it.

Alongside this, the legislature set out express defenses: under section 19YY(c), the court will not award compensation without proof of damage if the defendant proved, among other things, that an accessibility order was issued against them and they are complying with it on schedule; that a letter of undertaking was filed and they are meeting it; that a monetary sanction was imposed on them or an administrative warning was given to them for the same act; that a previous claim on the same matter has already been filed against them and they are acting according to the court’s ruling or according to a reasonable timetable; or that they sent a query to the Commission a reasonable time before the claim was filed. Section 19YY(e) adds that in awarding compensation, the court will weigh, among other things, the number of claims filed against the defendant, the scope of their activity, the cost of the adjustment and the rate of profit.

About “accessibility plugins” — and what the regulations really require

Plugins that promise accessibility at the click of a button are not mentioned in the regulations, and are not a criterion set in them. What is set is meeting the success criteria of the standard at level AA. A plugin can help with some of the requirements, but an image without alternative text in the code will stay without alternative text, and a form that cannot be completed with a keyboard will stay that way. The right check is against the standard, not against a supplier’s promise.

And if no demand has arrived yet — preventive steps in order

• Decide whether you must comply: check the average turnover in the last three tax years against the NIS 100,000 threshold, and if the website was set up before the regulations came into force — also against the NIS 1,000,000 threshold.
• Check against the standard: an automatic scan identifies only some of the defects. Add a manual check — navigation by keyboard only, use of a screen reader, and a contrast check.
• Publish an accessibility statement under regulation 35E, with a clear way to report a defect.
• Keep a handling log: the date each request was received, what was corrected and when, and which alternative adjustments were provided. This is what creates the defense in regulation 35A(d).
• Maintain: every content upload or design change can break accessibility. Set a periodic check.

Beyond the website: where else the accessibility duty applies

The website is only one component. The service accessibility regulations also regulate the adjustment of procedures, processes and practices in providing the service; accessibility at the place where the service is provided; and the means of contact — providing service by telephone, fax, text message, mail and email. A body that operates an accessible website but answers requests only through a channel that is not accessible has not completed the duty.

In employment, the law prohibits discrimination on the grounds of disability and requires an employer to make adjustments for an employee or a candidate with a disability, unless the adjustment imposes an undue burden in the circumstances; the state participates in part of the cost of the adjustments. The employment chapter of the law does not apply to an employer of fewer than six employees (section 13(a) of the Law, which applies section 21(c) of the Employment (Equal Opportunities) Law, 5748-1988 (חוק שוויון ההזדמנויות בעבודה, התשמ״ח-1988)).

And finally — the business logic. An accessible website is a website where a purchase can be completed by keyboard only, a form can be read with a screen reader and an error field can be identified. These are exactly the points where customers abandon a cart, regardless of disability.

FAQ

I received a demand letter because of an inaccessible website: what do I do?

Regulation 35A(d)(1) provides that a deviation from the provisions of Article C shall not be regarded as a breach of the accessibility provisions, unless a notice was sent to the person required to comply demanding that they correct it, and the person required to comply did not correct it within a reasonable time, but no later than 60 days from the day the notice was received. So the first three steps are: document the date the demand was received, check whether the business must comply at all under the turnover test in regulation 35F, and start a documented correction within the window. At the same time, regulation 35A(d)(2) requires making alternative adjustments as soon as possible from the date the notice was received, without waiting for the correction to be completed. Not responding to the demand is what turns a website that does not meet the standard into a cause of action.

What defenses does a business have in a claim over website accessibility?

Section 19YY(c) of the Equal Rights for Persons with Disabilities Law, 5758-1998 provides that the court will not award compensation without proof of damage for breach of the accessibility regulations if the defendant proved, among other things, one of the following: that an accessibility order was issued against them for the same act or omission and they are complying with it on its schedule; that they filed a letter of undertaking under Article C of Chapter I before the act or omission and they are complying with it; that a monetary sanction was imposed on them or an administrative warning was given to them for the same act or omission before it; that a previous claim on the same matter was filed against them and they are complying with the court’s ruling, or that the previous claim was filed less than three months before the claim in question and they are acting according to a reasonable timetable; or that they sent a query to the Commission for Equal Rights of Persons with Disabilities a reasonable time before the claim was filed. Alongside these, the provision in regulation 35A(d) applies, under which a deviation counts as a breach only if it was not corrected within 60 days of receiving a demand.

Does an accessibility plugin on the website solve the duty?

Plugins that promise accessibility at the click of a button are not mentioned in the regulations and are not a criterion set in them. What regulation 35A(a) sets is meeting Israeli Standard IS 5568 at level AA. A plugin can help with some of the requirements, but an image without alternative text in the code will stay without alternative text, and a form that cannot be completed with a keyboard will stay that way. The right check is against the criteria of the standard, including a manual check of keyboard navigation, screen reader and contrast — and not against a supplier’s promise.

From what date must a website in Israel be made accessible?

The date for completing the adjustments was set at 26 October 2017, under an amendment to the regulations from 2016; on that same day the updated text of Article C (regulations 35A–35F), which is the law that applies today, also came into force. The regulations themselves are from 2013, and the date 25 October 2014 concerns only the transitional provision in regulation 35A(b) for those who had made adjustments at level A by then.

Which standard is required, and at what level?

Israeli Standard IS 5568, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, at level AA, including its parts and appendices as amended from time to time. The regulations refer to the Israeli standard, and not directly to a specific version of the international guidelines.

Must a small business make its website accessible?

Not necessarily. An exempt dealer, or anyone whose average annual turnover does not exceed NIS 100,000, is exempt from internet accessibility adjustments. Anyone whose average turnover is up to NIS 1,000,000 is exempt for a website they began operating before the regulations came into force, provided that the ways of contacting them are published in an accessible way; the exemption is valid for three years and can be renewed.

How much can you get in a claim over an inaccessible website?

Section 19YY(b) of the Equal Rights for Persons with Disabilities Law allows compensation without proof of damage up to an amount that the law states as NIS 50,000, updated once a year according to the index relative to the February 2005 index (section 19YY(f)) — linking to the August 2026 index gives about NIS 74,720, for illustration only, because the law does not state the date of the update. You can also file a motion to certify a class action under item 9(1) of the Second Schedule to the Class Actions Law. The defendant has the defenses in section 19YY(c), and alongside them the rule that a deviation counts as a breach only if it was not corrected within 60 days of receiving a demand.

Can you file a class action because of an inaccessible website?

Yes. A class action can be filed only in a claim listed in the Second Schedule to the Class Actions Law, 5766-2006, or in a matter that another law has expressly provided for (section 3(a)), and item 9(1) of the Schedule includes a claim based on a cause of action under Chapters D, E or E1 of the Equal Rights for Persons with Disabilities Law. The practical difference: as a rule, compensation without proof of damage is not awarded in a class action, but section 20(e) expressly excludes claims under item 9. So the compensation without proof of damage in section 19YY(b) of the Equal Rights Law — a stated amount of NIS 50,000, updated once a year according to the index (section 19YY(f)) — is not ruled out on the class action route, and it is subject to the defenses in section 19YY(c). Filing the class action requires the court’s certification (section 3(b)).

Has anyone really been fined for breaching the accessibility duty?

Yes. The Commission for Equal Rights of Persons with Disabilities at the Ministry of Justice is authorized to impose a monetary sanction, and according to its announcements, checked on 17 October 2026, a sanction of NIS 41,336 was imposed on 11 December 2024 on the Arad Municipality for accessibility defects at a school. In an announcement of 27 April 2025 the Commission reported another sanction, of more than NIS 64,000, on the Be’er Ya’akov Municipality, and on 18 August 2025 a sanction of more than NIS 40,000 on the Merhavim Regional Council. All three decisions concern physical accessibility at an educational institution and not website accessibility, but they are the same enforcement route.