Using this site
This site is built to be used with a keyboard, at a readable contrast and without animation if you would rather not have it. This page sets out what has been done for that, and what has not.
Last updated: 23 September 2026
We aim to meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 at level AA. That is a commitment about how this site is built. It is not a certificate. No independent audit has been carried out and we do not claim the site conforms.
This page also says what has not been checked. A statement that lists only achievements is no use to someone who has just run into a barrier. If something here does not work for you, tell us, and we will tell you what we can do about it and when.
The standard we aim at
WCAG 2.1 is published by the World Wide Web Consortium. It organises accessibility into four principles — content should be perceivable, operable, understandable and robust — and states each requirement as a criterion that can be tested. Level AA is the middle of its three conformance levels and the one most widely adopted.
Aiming at a standard and conforming to it are different things. A conformance claim is something you make after testing, and the testing that matters most for this site has not been done yet. What follows separates the two, so you can see which is which.
What has been built in
These are things done deliberately while the site was built, not features added afterwards.
- Real landmarks on every page — a header, a navigation region, a main content region and a footer — so software that moves through a page by its structure has a structure to move through.
- One first-level heading per page, with the heading levels below it in order and no levels skipped.
- A Skip to content link as the first thing the keyboard reaches, so you can jump past the navigation to the page itself.
- Everything you can click, you can also reach and operate with the keyboard alone.
- The menu that opens on a narrow screen can be opened from the keyboard, keeps focus inside itself while it is open, closes when you press Escape and returns focus to the button that opened it. That behaviour is tested in a real browser rather than assumed.
- A visible outline around whatever currently has keyboard focus, so you can always see where you are on the page.
- Text colours measured against the backgrounds they actually sit on, to the WCAG AA thresholds of 4.5:1 for body text and 3:1 for large text and interface elements.
- Nothing on the site is signalled by colour alone.
- Images that carry meaning have a text alternative. Images that are pure decoration are marked as decoration, so they are skipped rather than read out as noise.
- If your device is set to reduce motion, the one decorative animation is never loaded or played and the still artwork is shown in its place. Transitions are reduced to effectively nothing at the same time.
- Page layouts checked at desktop, tablet and phone widths with no sideways scrolling at any of them.
One example of what that measuring is for: a colour we had chosen for small text came out at 4.36:1 against one of the backgrounds it was used on, below the 4.5:1 threshold. It was darkened until it passed, everywhere on the site it was used, rather than left as it was.
Using this site with a keyboard
Tab moves forward through the links and buttons, Shift and Tab moves back, and Enter follows a link or presses a button. The first stop on any page is the Skip to content link.
On a narrow screen, the menu button opens the navigation. Escape closes it and focus goes back to the button you opened it with.
If the focus outline disappears somewhere, or the order of the stops does not make sense, that is a defect rather than a design choice. We would like to hear about it.
What we have not verified
No screen-reader testing pass has been done. Nobody has worked through this site with NVDA, JAWS, VoiceOver or TalkBack. The landmarks, the text alternatives and the heading order were built so that a screen reader has something sensible to work with, but building for a screen reader and testing with one are not the same thing, and we are not going to describe the first as though it were the second.
There has been no independent accessibility audit and no certification. Nobody outside the team that built the site has checked it.
Automated checking was used during the build, and automated checking catches only part of the problem. Most accessibility failures need a person to find them.
Behaviour at very large text sizes and high browser zoom has not been measured separately from the width checks.
Documents and forms published by other organisations are outside our control. That includes the Department of Home Affairs and the Administrative Review Tribunal. If one of those is what you cannot get into, we can still go through it with you or set out what it says another way.
This is the section of the page worth trusting most. It should get shorter over time. When it does, the date at the top of this page changes with it.
If you need something in another format
Ask, and say what actually works for you. A document in large print, plain text in the body of an email instead of an attachment, a telephone call instead of a form — if we hold the information, we will try to give it to you in a form you can use.
If you reach us through a relay service, or with an interpreter, that is fine. Say so at the start and we will work with it.
The enquiry form on our contact page is not the only way in. The telephone number, email address and postal address below all reach the same people.
Telling us about a problem
Email or ring, whichever is easier for you. You do not need to know the technical name for what went wrong. The menu will not close is a perfectly good report and we can usually work from it.
If you can give us any of the following it will be quicker, but do not hold off reporting something because you do not have all of it.
- The address of the page, or enough of its title for us to find it
- What you were trying to do
- What happened instead
- The browser and the device you were using
- Any assistive technology you use, and its version if you know it
What we will do when you report something
We will acknowledge your report and tell you who is looking at it. We will not leave it unanswered.
We will tell you what we found, whether it can be fixed and when we expect that to happen. Where a fix is going to take time, we will offer you the information another way in the meantime rather than asking you to wait for the website.
If our answer does not resolve it for you, our complaints page sets out how to take it further, including the independent path that does not depend on this firm’s goodwill.
When this page was last changed
This statement was last reviewed on 23 September 2026 and describes the site as it was built at that date.
It is not a fixed document. As testing is done, the list of what has not been verified will shrink and this page will be updated to match. If you are reading it long after the date above and that list still looks the same, that is itself worth telling us about.
How to reach the practice
These are the firm’s published contact details. Accessibility reports can go to the general email address or telephone number.
(02) 8806 0866
Suite 301, 67-69 Philip Street, Parramatta NSW 2150
Level 35, Tower One, International Towers, 100 Barangaroo Avenue, Sydney NSW 2000
Blacktown, Liverpool and Bankstown
Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation