Legal Challenge and Policy Quashed
Mr Justice Sheldon ruled that the recent Home Office policy change was unlawful, marking the first time such a policy has been challenged and overturned in court. This decision ensures that individuals removed to France under the 'one in one out' scheme now have the opportunity to have their trafficking claims reconsidered. The judge stated that the policy change was essentially erased from legal standing, as if it had never taken place. This outcome sets a significant precedent and may encourage others who have faced similar challenges to seek legal redress.
Policy Overview
The 'one in one out' policy operates by forcibly removing asylum seekers who arrive in the UK via small boat crossings, while simultaneously bringing an equivalent number from northern France to the UK. The government launched this initiative in an effort to discourage small boat crossings. While these crossings have dropped by more than 40% compared to the same period last year, recent data shows a surge, with over 1,000 people arriving in the last week alone. Tragically, four individuals lost their lives attempting the journey.
Asylum seekers returned to France now have the right to have their trafficking claims reviewed again. However, the practical application of this right remains uncertain. Many of the individuals removed under the policy have vanished without a trace. Some have sought to avoid detection by hiding after facing threats from smugglers in France. Others have left the country altogether after being warned of potential removal to their home countries or other European nations where they were previously fingerprinted during their asylum journey.
The individual ordered to be returned to the UK was removed to France on 27 November 2025. There is strong evidence that he was a victim of trafficking. Hailing from Sudan, he is a survivor of torture and one of five individuals who contested the Home Secretary’s policy change. Another asylum seeker, who was also sent to France, will now have his trafficking claim reviewed again. If this reconsideration yields a positive outcome, he too may be returned to the UK.
Legal and Human Rights Perspectives
Emily Soothill of Deighton Pierce Glynn expressed relief that the court recognized the unlawful nature of the man's removal, which means he can now return to the UK. This ruling has significant implications for him, for other trafficking victims who may have been wrongly removed, and for upholding the rule of law.
Elizabeth Cole, a solicitor at Duncan Lewis, also welcomed the ruling. She emphasized that the decision challenges the lawfulness of earlier removals conducted under the UK-France treaty. Cole expressed hope that this case could pave the way for others who have been unlawfully sent to France to seek justice and potentially return to the UK.
Home Office sources are currently in the process of evaluating the judgment, including considering potential appeals. The outcome of this case could trigger a broader legal review of the 'one in one out' policy and the rights of those affected. This decision not only impacts the individuals directly involved but may also influence future policy decisions regarding the treatment of asylum seekers.