This note is currently under review by the National Enabling Architecture Committee, specifically in relation to findings of the recent Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service court case as below:
- Ryan as Personal Representative of the Estate of the Late Peter John Ryan v Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service [2021] FCCA 1537 (Judgment of 06 July 2021)
- Federal Circuit Court of Australia Order in the case of David Andrew Ryan as Personal Representative of the Estate of the Late Peter John Ryan v Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service (04 August 2021).
Further resource:
- Queensland Health Wayfinding Design Guidelines (December 2010).
A number of complaints have been made under state and federal anti-discrimination legislation about buildings which do not have, in the complainants' opinion, adequate signage for people who cannot use visual signage.
Signage systems that accommodate all users incorporate raised tactile and Braille characters. The principle of design, and the essence of the complaints, is that wherever visual signage is installed, it should either incorporate raised tactile and Braille signage, or be duplicated by it. Favouring one group of users to the detriment of another is claimed to be discriminatory, and installing a system of information and way-finding which does not inform all users is claimed to meet that definition.
The relevant part of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 is found in the definition of indirect discrimination, as follows:
Indirect discrimination occurs when a person requires a person with a disability to comply with a requirement or condition:
- with which a substantially higher proportion of persons without the disability comply or are able to comply
- which is not reasonable having regard to the circumstances of the case
- with which the person does not or is not able to comply
It does not necessarily follow, however, that where there is no visual signage present, the absence of raised tactile and Braille signage is ineffective as the basis of a complaint. It is a requirement of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 that management makes apparent to all occupants the location of required facilities. For facilities to be apparent to all occupants, Braille and tactile signage may be required.
Designers, as a matter of course, should consider the purpose of any sign before designing or locating it. Designers who understand the principle in the legislation consider the needs of all potential users. In many cases, raised tactile and Braille signage located at the correct height will meet those needs. In cases where it is considered insufficient, overhead visual signage provides the necessary supplement.
The cost of implementing such a design policy is unlikely to invoke provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, which renders it 'not unlawful' to discriminate against a person on the grounds of the person's disability if the action results in unjustifiable hardship on the part of the provider. In fact, in the known cases resolved by conciliation to date, the cost of adjusting the signage has been less than the cost of defending the complaint, and pragmatic decisions have prevailed.
Of all design elements, signage is likely to be standardised, and may also be intended to promote corporate or institutional image, as well as to provide information and way-finding services. The influence of the individual designer may be minimal in any project. Nonetheless, designers are advised to inform their clients of the vulnerability to complaint of systems which do not recognise these principles.
Disclaimer
This content is provided by the Australian Institute of Architects for reference purposes and as general guidance. It does not take into account specific circumstances and should not be relied on in that way. It is not legal, financial, insurance, or other advice and you should seek independent verification or advice before relying on this content in circumstances where loss or damage may result. The Institute endeavours to publish content that is accurate at the time it is published, but does not accept responsibility for content that may or has become inaccurate over time. Using this website and content is subject to the Acumen User Licence.