The core of administrative law revolves around the quality of ordinary processes that shape the public's direct interactions with the state, often discussed in terms of procedural fairness. Traditionally, doctrines of procedural fairness have been crafted—whether by the courts or legislatures—without sufficient consideration of public perceptions of what constitutes good process. This oversight also extends to the development of public policy, where frontline processes are devised and implemented by government officials.

To address this research gap, this project explores public perceptions of procedural fairness in relation to disability benefits. The focus is on examining how adults with long-term illness and/or disabilities perceive procedural fairness in the context of applying for disability-related benefits.

Understanding how these claimants evaluate procedural fairness in benefit application processes is crucial, particularly in the realm of disability-related benefits. Experiences of fairness or unfairness during these procedures may significantly impact individuals' willingness to disclose information about their conditions, report changes in their circumstances, or feel confident in lodging complaints when they feel something has gone wrong. Each of these factors can profoundly affect their ability to access their full entitlements.

• Funder: abrdn Financial Fairness Trust
• Law School researchers: Prof Simon Halliday, Dr Ruth Friskney