A High Court judge has ordered the Home Office to bring back to the UK an alleged victim of trafficking who was forcibly removed to France under the controversial “one in one out” scheme. The ruling, the first of its kind, quashes a Home Office policy change that refused asylum seekers the right to have their trafficking claims reconsidered after an initial rejection, potentially opening the door for more affected individuals to return.
Landmark ruling against Home Office policy
Mr Justice Sheldon, presiding over the case, declared the policy change unlawful, stating: “I have quashed it so that it is as if it never happened.” The decision means that asylum seekers returned to France under the scheme now have the right to have trafficking cases that were initially rejected reconsidered. The judge also specifically ordered the return of a Sudanese asylum seeker, a survivor of torture, who was forcibly removed to France on 27 November 2025, after reasonable grounds were identified that he is a victim of trafficking.
The “one in one out” policy, part of a UK-France treaty, forcibly removes some individuals who cross the Channel in small boats in exchange for bringing a similar number from northern France legally to the UK. The government hopes the scheme will deter small boat crossings, which have reduced by more than 40% compared with the same period last year. However, in the last week alone, over 1,000 people have arrived, and on Thursday, four people died attempting the journey.
Legal challenge and broader implications
The Sudanese man was one of five people who challenged the home secretary’s policy change. A second asylum seeker, also involved in the legal challenge and sent to France, will have his trafficking case reconsidered in France. Depending on the outcome, he too may be brought back to the UK. The High Court has granted both the Home Office and the asylum seekers permission to appeal on various points in the judgment.
Emily Soothill, of Deighton Pierce Glynn, representing the Sudanese man, welcomed the decision. “Our client is a vulnerable victim of trafficking and torture who has suffered significantly as a result of the Home Office’s unlawful decision-making,” she said. “We are delighted that the court has rightly recognised that his removal to France was unlawful and that he must therefore be brought back to the UK. This is a highly significant decision; for our client, for other victims of trafficking who may have been unlawfully removed to France and for ensuring that the rule of law is upheld.”
Uncertainty for those removed
It remains unclear how the right to reconsideration will work in practice, as many of those forcibly removed to France who have previously claimed to have been trafficked have now disappeared. Some have gone underground after being threatened by smugglers in northern France. Others have fled France after being threatened with removal to their home country or to another EU country where they were previously fingerprinted on their journey seeking asylum.
Elizabeth Cole, a solicitor at Duncan Lewis, whose asylum seeker client in France took part in the legal challenge, also welcomed the decision. “The court’s decision calls into question the lawfulness of previous removals under the UK-France treaty where a negative reasonable grounds decision was made or reconsideration was denied,” she said. “We hope that this will allow a broader cohort of cases who have been removed to France unlawfully under the treaty to obtain justice and potentially return to the UK.”
Home Office response
Home Office sources say they are carefully considering the judgment, including their options for appeal. The ruling marks a significant legal setback for the government’s immigration policy, which has been a cornerstone of its efforts to reduce Channel crossings. With the potential for more cases to be reviewed, the decision could have far-reaching consequences for the “one in one out” scheme and the treatment of trafficking victims within the asylum system.
