LONDON — Britain’s High Court issued a ruling Friday that the government had broken the law by taking away asylum seekers’ ability to challenge decisions that found they were not victims of human trafficking, before those individuals could be deported.
The country’s Home Office, which oversees interior affairs, changed its policy last September to prevent people who had been ruled out as trafficking victims from contesting that determination prior to removal from the country.
That policy shift came in response to a string of legal challenges that had been slowing down deportations under Britain’s “one in, one out” agreement with France — a deal designed to manage the flow of migrants crossing the English Channel.
Five asylum seekers who had been sent back to France, or were at risk of being sent back, challenged the policy in court. On Friday, the High Court sided with them, declaring the revised guidance unlawful.
The court found that many asylum seekers who had made the dangerous small-boat crossing from France across the Channel were being blocked from presenting critical evidence when their trafficking claims were reviewed.
Judge Clive Sheldon pointed to a striking statistic: in 2025, 79% of people initially found not to be trafficking victims later received a favorable decision when their cases were looked at again.
The Home Office announced plans to appeal the ruling. A spokesperson issued a statement saying, “Last-minute modern slavery claims must not be used to frustrate the removal of illegal migrants.”
Attorneys for some of the asylum seekers who brought the case called the ruling a victory, but noted that many individuals had already been sent back to France under the unlawful policy.
The decision represents another obstacle for the government as it tries to reduce illegal immigration — one of the most divisive issues in British politics, one that has even overshadowed concerns about the country’s struggling economy.
The arrival of migrants on small boats and the placement of asylum seekers in hotels have become flashpoints, sometimes sparking public protests and tensions in local communities.
Britain’s Labour government has been pushing stricter immigration measures in part to counter Nigel Farage’s anti-immigration Reform UK party, though that approach has drawn criticism from left-leaning supporters who argue there should be safer, legal pathways for people seeking asylum.
One of the five people who brought the court challenge — a person who was returned to France and was granted anonymity by the court, as is standard in asylum cases — described experiencing “a feeling of hopelessness.”
“When a lot of individuals enter the United Kingdom to seek refuge, and have experienced a lot of difficult situations, being further mistreated is simply heart-breaking,” the person said in a written statement.
“The overwhelming sentiment is that they do not treat people equally,” they added. “Some people they place in hotels, some they return to France, like me.”
