HomeEverythingEducation
Equities & FundsCrypto & Digital AssetsAI & TechnologyBusiness & CorporateUS Politics & PolicyGeopolitics & Global RiskMacro, Rates & FXCommodities & EnergyEuropean Politics & MarketsAsia-PacificReal Estate & Property
Story archiveAll categories
← All Stories

UK High Court rules against government on asylum seeker rejections

Created at 10 Jul · 1:54 PM1 source↑ Market-relevant
IN SHORT

Britain's High Court ruled that the Home Office acted unlawfully by changing guidance that prevented asylum seekers, including potential trafficking victims, from challenging rejection decisions before removal. The government plans to appeal.

✉Newsletter

PiQ Daily

Pick your topics. Get only what matters, on your cadence.

Key Numbers

79%of people initially deemed not victims of trafficking received positive decision

Who's Involved

Clive Sheldon
Judge who noted asylum seekers would be denied reliance on key evidence
Home Office
British interior ministry that changed guidance on asylum seeker rejections
Nigel Farage
Leader of populist, anti-migration Reform UK party

↳ Why This Matters

The ruling undermines the government's strategy to curb illegal migration and highlights legal challenges to its immigration policies, potentially impacting future removal decisions and international agreements on asylum.

Key facts

  • Britain's High Court ruled the Home Office acted unlawfully by changing guidance on asylum seeker rejections.
  • The change prevented asylum seekers, including potential trafficking victims, from challenging rejection decisions before removal.
  • The ruling impacts individuals arriving via small boats from France.
  • The government plans to appeal the High Court's decision.
  • The case is a setback for the government's efforts to curb illegal migration.

Britain's High Court ruled on Friday that the government acted unlawfully by altering its policy on rejecting asylum seekers, particularly those who might be victims of trafficking. The Home Office had changed its guidance in September to prevent individuals deemed not to be victims of trafficking from challenging that decision before being removed from the country.

This change was introduced following legal challenges to planned removals under a deal with France, intended to prevent claims of trafficking from obstructing the deportation process. However, five asylum seekers who had been removed or faced removal to France challenged the guidance, and the High Court found it to be unlawful.

Judge Clive Sheldon highlighted that the amended guidance would deny many asylum seekers, who arrived by crossing the Channel in small boats, the ability to use crucial evidence when their trafficking claims were assessed. He noted that in 2025, 79% of individuals initially deemed not to be trafficking victims received a positive decision upon reconsideration.

The Home Office stated its intention to appeal the ruling, with a spokesperson asserting that "last-minute modern slavery claims must not be used to frustrate the removal of illegal migrants." Lawyers representing some of the claimants welcomed the court's decision but pointed out that many individuals had already been unlawfully removed to France.

The ruling represents a significant setback for the government's agenda to reduce illegal migration, a key political issue in Britain. The government has been attempting to tighten immigration policies, partly in response to the anti-migration stance of Reform UK, a move that has alienated some of its supporters. The claimant who was returned to France, and granted anonymity, described experiencing "a feeling of hopelessness" and stated that the treatment of asylum seekers was unequal, with some placed in hotels while others, like them, were returned to France.

Frequently asked questions

The High Court ruled that the Home Office acted unlawfully by changing its guidance, which prevented asylum seekers, including potential trafficking victims, from challenging decisions rejecting their claims before removal.

The change was introduced after legal challenges to planned removals under a deal with France, aiming to prevent trafficking claims from blocking the removal of illegal migrants.

The Home Office has stated its intention to appeal the High Court's decision, arguing that last-minute modern slavery claims should not be used to frustrate the removal of illegal migrants.

The ruling is considered a setback for the government's efforts to reduce illegal migration, particularly arrivals via small boats, and raises questions about the legality of past removals.

What Happens Next

01The Home Office will appeal the High Court's ruling.

Get the newsletter.

Pick the topics you actually care about. We'll email when there's news worth your time, on the cadence you choose. Cancel any time from your account.

Cadence

How It Developed

Britain's Home Office changed guidance to prevent asylum seekers from challenging decisions on potential trafficking victims.
The change aimed to stop trafficking claims from blocking removals under a deal with France.
Five asylum seekers challenged the amended guidance.
The High Court ruled the amended guidance unlawful.
The court stated many asylum seekers would be denied reliance on key evidence.
The Home Office announced plans to appeal the ruling.
Lawyers for some claimants welcomed the ruling but noted some individuals had already been unlawfully removed.

Sources

T1
UK loses case over asylum seeker rejections linked to migrant deal with FranceReuters

Related Stories

Italy court acquits charity migrant rescuers accused of waste trafficking
10 Jul · 12:06 PM
UK's Clacton by-election, triggered by Farage, to take place on August 13
10 Jul · 10:03 AM
Spain's High Court Investigates PM's Former Chief of Staff in Graft Probe
10 Jul · 2:26 PM
Andy Burnham Poised to Become UK PM, Eyes Increased Pressure on Israel
9 Jul · 5:55 PM
EU charges Meta over 'addictive design' on Facebook, Instagram
10 Jul · 10:03 AM