EAA vs UK Equality Act 2026 | Post-Brexit Web Accessibility Compliance

Last updated: 2026-05-06

After Brexit, UK businesses with European customers face two distinct accessibility regimes that overlap in spirit but differ sharply in mechanics. The European Accessibility Act (Directive 2019/882) became enforceable across EU member states on 28 June 2025 and now applies to a defined set of products and services — including e-commerce, banking, e-books, transport ticketing, and consumer hardware — sold to EU consumers, regardless of where the seller is based. The UK Equality Act 2010, by contrast, has been the operative anti-discrimination law for UK websites since well before Brexit, framing inaccessible digital services as a failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 29. The two laws answer related questions in different ways: the EAA prescribes specific technical standards and conformity procedures, while the Equality Act sets a general duty and lets case law and the Equality and Human Rights Commission fill in the detail. A UK retailer selling into Germany has to satisfy both. A UK retailer selling only domestically still has obligations, just framed differently. This comparison maps the practical differences so legal, product, and engineering teams can size the work correctly. Not legal advice — consult a qualified solicitor for your specific situation.

At a Glance

Feature European Accessibility Act (EAA) UK Equality Act 2010
Geographic scope 27 EU member states (extra-territorial: applies to non-EU sellers reaching EU consumers) United Kingdom (England, Wales, Scotland; Northern Ireland under separate regime in some respects)
Sectoral scope Listed products and services (e-commerce, banking, e-books, transport, consumer hardware, etc.) All providers of services to the public, plus employment, education, and goods
Technical standard EN 301 549 (incorporates WCAG 2.1/2.2 AA) No single standard prescribed; WCAG 2.2 AA is treated as best-practice evidence
Enforcement model National market surveillance authorities + administrative penalties Individual claims in county court; EHRC strategic enforcement
Key deadline 28 June 2025 (already in force) In force since 1 October 2010; PSBAR public sector deadline was 23 September 2020
Penalties Administrative fines (e.g., Germany up to 100,000 EUR per infringement) Damages plus injury to feelings (Vento bands) plus legal costs
Microenterprise / small business relief Service providers under 10 employees and under 2M EUR turnover are exempt No formal carve-out; size and cost are factors in 'reasonable adjustment' assessment
Required documentation EU declaration of conformity, technical documentation, internal production controls No prescribed documentation, but accessibility statement and policy strongly recommended

European Accessibility Act (EAA)

Type: EU directive (transposed into national laws across 27 member states) Pricing: Compliance cost varies by scope; non-compliance fines vary by member state (commonly 5,000-100,000+ EUR per infringement; some states impose daily penalties) Best for: UK and global businesses selling listed products or services to EU consumers; organisations that want a defined technical standard and a documented conformity trail.

Pros

  • Prescriptive: harmonised standard EN 301 549 (which incorporates WCAG 2.1 / 2.2 AA) provides a clear technical target with measurable success criteria
  • Conformity procedure includes documentation, internal production controls, and an EU declaration that gives organisations a defined audit trail
  • Applies to non-EU sellers including UK businesses that target consumers in the EU, levelling the playing field against domestic EU competitors
  • Microenterprise carve-out (under 10 employees and under 2M EUR turnover) for service providers reduces burden on the smallest organisations

Cons

  • Scope is narrower than many people assume — applies to listed products and services (e-commerce, ATMs, e-books, transport, banking, etc.), not all websites
  • Transposition varies — Germany, France, Ireland, and Italy each enforce the directive through their own national law with different penalties and authorities
  • Disproportionate burden exemption is allowed but must be documented and justified, and enforcement bodies are starting to challenge weak justifications
  • Compliance costs can be high for smaller B2C sellers that fall outside the microenterprise carve-out (typically 11-49 employees)

UK Equality Act 2010

Type: UK primary legislation (anti-discrimination duty, including reasonable adjustments) Pricing: Civil claims can result in damages and costs; injury to feelings awards under the Vento bands (lower 1,200-12,100 GBP, middle 12,100-36,400 GBP, upper 36,400-60,700 GBP as of recent guidance); legal fees often higher than damages Best for: All UK-facing digital services, including those outside EAA scope; public sector bodies subject to PSBAR; and organisations building an accessibility programme grounded in the broader duty rather than a one-off compliance project.

Pros

  • Broad scope — covers any service provider in the UK, not just listed product categories, so digital services that fall outside EAA scope are still captured
  • Reasonable adjustments duty is anticipatory: providers should plan in advance, not wait until a disabled user complains
  • EHRC guidance and case law (including Wightman, Ross v Ryanair, and county court accessibility claims) provide accumulating practical interpretation
  • Public Sector Bodies Accessibility Regulations 2018 sit alongside the Equality Act and impose WCAG 2.2 AA on public sector sites with published reporting

Cons

  • Duty is principle-based, not prescriptive — what counts as a 'reasonable adjustment' depends on context, size, cost, and effect, leaving uncertainty
  • Enforcement is mainly through individual claims in the county court rather than proactive regulator audits, so risk depends on whether a claimant turns up
  • Damages are typically lower than US ADA settlement ranges, which has historically reduced incentive to remediate proactively
  • Reasonable-adjustments framing means there is no single technical standard a small business can simply 'pass' — WCAG is treated as evidence, not a safe harbour

Our Verdict

If you sell into the EU, the EAA is the load-bearing law because it has a defined standard (EN 301 549) and a defined enforcement mechanism. If you operate only in the UK, the Equality Act has been your obligation for fifteen years and remains the primary risk vector — but UK businesses cannot ignore the EAA, because EU consumer-facing e-commerce, banking, e-books, and transport are all in scope regardless of where your office is. The pragmatic path for most UK organisations is to design to WCAG 2.2 AA, document your conformance, publish an accessibility statement, and treat that as evidence under both regimes. WCAG 2.2 AA is not a legal safe harbour under either law, but it is the closest thing to one. The cost of a single county court claim or a single market-surveillance investigation typically exceeds the cost of an annual manual audit by a wide margin, so the question for the boardroom is rarely 'are we required to comply' — it is 'how do we evidence what we have done if challenged.' Not legal advice; consult a qualified UK or EU solicitor for your specific situation.

Further Reading

Other Comparisons