South Korea’s top court orders cinemas to provide audio and visual aids for people with disabilities
Translated from English and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- South Korea’s Supreme Court said cinemas must provide audio descriptions, subtitles or hearing aids for people with visual or hearing impairments.
- The court rejected a lower-court approach that limited the requirement to screens with at least 300 seats and 3% of screenings.
- The case began in 2016 when four plaintiffs sued CGV, Lotte Cultureworks and Megabox JoongAng.
South Korea’s Supreme Court has rejected limits that would have restricted accessibility services for people with visual or hearing impairments to larger cinemas and a small share of screenings.
The court reversed and remanded a Seoul High Court decision that said the services should be required only in screens with at least 300 seats. The lower court had also said screenings with audio or visual assistance should account for 3 per cent of all screenings.
“By applying limits for both screening frequencies and screen sizes, the ruling only considered the financial burden of the defendants (theatres), and thus overstepped the boundaries of (the court’s) discretion,” the Supreme Court said.
It ruled that failing to provide assistance for the plaintiffs’ visual or hearing impairments amounted to discrimination under South Korea’s Act on the Prohibition of Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities and Remedy Against Infringement of Their Rights. The appellate court must now reconsider how to end discrimination against people with disabilities seeking to enjoy cultural content, while avoiding excessive confusion for other moviegoers.
Four plaintiffs filed the lawsuit in 2016 against the operators of South Korea’s largest cinema franchises, CGV, Lotte Cultureworks and Megabox JoongAng. They argued that people with disabilities should have the same right to watch films as everyone else. They won the first-instance ruling in 2017, when the court said cinemas must provide tools such as audio descriptions, subtitles and hearing aids. It also required cinema websites to identify supported films, screening times and available screens.
By applying limits for both screening frequencies and screen sizes, the ruling only considered the financial burden of the defendants (theatres), and thus overstepped the boundaries of (the court’s) discretion.
Originally published by The Straits Times in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.