Compliable | Precedent-Aware Report
Maplebrook Boutique Co.
https://maplebrook-boutique.example.ca | Storefront and online ordering
Litigation history match
Moderate exposure pattern
1,450 / 5,000
Tier: moderate
- image-alt: 4 elements, cited in 18 catalog cases
- button-name: 3 elements, cited in 7 catalog cases
- color-contrast: 2 elements, cited in 9 catalog cases
- label: 2 elements, cited in 13 catalog cases
- link-name: 1 element, cited in 13 catalog cases
Framework applied: AODA, Ontario Human Rights Code, and the Accessible Canada Act (federal nexus where applicable). 1 finding flagged as needing manual review for full alignment with cited cases.
Summary by rule
| Rule |
Severity |
Findings |
WCAG |
Catalog cases |
| image-alt |
serious |
4 |
1.1.1 |
18 |
| button-name |
serious |
3 |
4.1.2 |
7 |
| color-contrast |
moderate |
2 |
1.4.3 |
9 |
| label |
serious |
2 |
3.3.2, 4.1.2 |
13 |
| link-name |
serious |
1 |
2.4.4, 4.1.2 |
13 |
Findings (12)
1. Product image missing alt text
serious
WCAG 1.1.1
Three product images on the shop catalog page render without an alt attribute. Screen reader users cannot identify the product.
main > section.products > ul > li:nth-child(3) > img
Litigation history
NFB v. Target
2008 N.D. Cal. class settlement. $6M class damages plus $3.7M attorney fees. Missing alt text on product images cited as a core barrier.
Andrews v. Blick Art Materials
2017 E.D.N.Y. Judge Weinstein adopted WCAG 2.0 AA after a science-day screen reader demonstration. Missing alt text central to the complaint.
Donna Jodhan v. Canada
2010 FC 1197. Foundational Canadian Charter ruling on federal site inaccessibility for blind users. Missing alt text on form-adjacent images cited.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
2. Hero banner image has decorative alt that hides product context
serious
WCAG 1.1.1
Hero banner uses alt="" but conveys promotional product information that sighted users see.
header > div.hero > img.hero-banner
Litigation history
Robles v. Domino's Pizza
2019 9th Cir. ADA applies to a brick-and-mortar website with a nexus to the physical place of accommodation. Missing alt text and screen reader incompatibility central to remand.
Del-Orden v. Bonobos
2017 S.D.N.Y. Image maps and decorative images without context cited as barriers; shopping cart icon read only as a number.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
3. Product card image identical to product name alt
moderate
WCAG 1.1.1
Product card image carries the same alt as the product link immediately after it, producing duplicate screen reader announcements.
main > ul.products > li > a.card > img
Litigation history
Alcazar v. Fashion Nova
2025 C.D. Cal. $5.15M class settlement. Standard alt-text plus link-name suite cited as primary screen reader barriers.
NFB v. Target
2008 N.D. Cal. Foundational alt-text ruling on product imagery.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
4. Decorative SVG icon has no role or accessible label distinction
minor
WCAG 1.1.1
SVG icon inside the search button does not declare aria-hidden="true" or a meaningful label, so screen readers announce a generic shape.
header > form.search > button > svg
Litigation history
Andrews v. Blick Art Materials
2017 E.D.N.Y. Improperly coded navigation and decorative imagery prevented screen reader users from skipping repetitive content.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
5. Add-to-cart button has only an icon and no accessible name
serious
WCAG 4.1.2
Cart button uses an icon-only design; aria-label is absent. Screen readers announce "button" with no further context.
main > section.product > button.add-to-cart
Litigation history
Del-Orden v. Bonobos
2017 S.D.N.Y. Add-to-cart button with no accessible text cited as a primary barrier to checkout.
Robles v. Domino's Pizza
2019 9th Cir. Inability to complete checkout as a blind user. Button-name and screen reader compatibility central.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
6. Filter chevron buttons announce as "button" only
serious
WCAG 4.1.2
Collapsible filter sections use buttons containing only a chevron SVG. No accessible name; aria-expanded missing.
aside.filters > section > h3 > button
Litigation history
DOJ v. Rite Aid (vaccine portal)
2021 settlement. Broken tab order on the consent form, missing accessible names, and color contrast cited together as core defects.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
7. Mobile menu toggle has icon-only button
serious
WCAG 4.1.2
Hamburger menu button has no accessible name. Mobile screen reader users cannot identify the toggle.
header > nav > button.menu-toggle
Litigation history
Robles v. Domino's Pizza
Mobile app and mobile website screen reader incompatibility central to the 9th Circuit's nexus holding.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
8. Promotional banner text at 3.4:1 contrast against background photo
moderate
WCAG 1.4.3
Hero banner overlay text fails the 4.5:1 minimum on its photographic background at smaller breakpoints.
header > div.hero > h1.headline
Litigation history
DOJ v. Rite Aid (vaccine portal)
2021 settlement. Insufficient color contrast on text and links cited explicitly. First DOJ enforcement to adopt WCAG 2.1 AA.
Charles Schwab structured negotiation
2024 agreement adopted WCAG 2.2 AA. Color contrast and focus-not-obscured criteria called out.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
9. Footer link colour at 4.1:1 contrast against footer background
moderate
WCAG 1.4.3
Footer "Privacy Policy" and "Accessibility Statement" links fall just below the 4.5:1 threshold.
footer > nav > ul > li > a
Litigation history
DOJ v. Rite Aid (vaccine portal)
2021 settlement. Insufficient color contrast on links cited as a core barrier.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
10. Newsletter email field has placeholder but no programmatic label
serious
WCAG 3.3.2, 4.1.2
The newsletter signup field shows "Email" as a placeholder only. No <label> or aria-label is associated, so screen readers announce only the input type.
footer > form.newsletter > input[type="email"]
Litigation history
Robles v. Domino's Pizza
Missing form labels central to inability to complete the checkout flow.
Andrews v. Blick Art Materials
2017 E.D.N.Y. Form controls not navigable with keyboard alone; labels missing or incorrectly associated.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
11. Checkout shipping form field uses placeholder as label
serious
WCAG 3.3.2
Shipping address line 2 input on the checkout step uses placeholder text only. Field carries no associated <label>.
main > form.checkout > div.address > input#address2
Litigation history
DOJ v. H&R Block
2014 consent decree. Tax preparation product, web, and mobile inaccessible to blind users. Form labels and screen reader support central.
NFB v. Target
Inaccessible form fields on checkout cited as one of the core barriers in the 2008 settlement.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.
12. "Read more" link repeated across product cards with no distinguishing context
serious
WCAG 2.4.4, 4.1.2
"Read more" link appears nine times on the home page with identical accessible name. Screen reader users hear a list of "Read more, Read more, Read more" without product context.
main > section.featured > article > a.read-more
Litigation history
Gil v. Winn-Dixie
2021 11th Cir. (vacated as moot). Link-name and label issues cited in plaintiff's pre-vacatur complaint. Defense-favoring jurisdiction note: 11th Circuit rejected the nexus theory.
Markett v. Five Guys
2017 S.D.N.Y. Repeated and unlabeled link patterns cited. S.D.N.Y. accepted Title III applies to QSR websites either as own place of accommodation or as service of physical restaurants.
Alcazar v. Fashion Nova
2025 C.D. Cal. $5.15M settlement. Standard link-name and label suite cited as core barriers for screen reader users.
Past lawsuits citing similar issues. Not legal advice.