A High Court judge has ordered the Home Office to bring an alleged victim of trafficking forcibly removed to France under the “one in, one out” scheme back to the UK.
The ruling, the first of its kind, could lead to more people affected by the policy being brought back to the UK. Mr Justice Sheldon has quashed a Home Office policy change that refused asylum seekers the right to have their trafficking claims reconsidered after an initial rejection.
“I have quashed it so that it is as if it never happened,” he said.
The ‘One in, One Out’ Policy
The “one in, one out” policy forcibly removes some people 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.
Crossings have reduced by more than 40% compared with this time last year, but in the last week more than 1,000 people have arrived, and on Thursday four people died attempting the journey.
The Case
The man whom the judge has ordered the Home Office to bring back from France was forcibly returned there on 27 November 2025. Reasonable grounds have been identified that he is a victim of trafficking. He is an asylum seeker from Sudan, a survivor of torture, and one of five people who challenged the Home Secretary’s policy change.
A second asylum seeker sent to France, who was also involved in the legal challenge, 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 the Home Office and the asylum seekers permission to appeal on various points in the judgment.
What the Ruling Means
Asylum seekers returned to France now have a right to have trafficking cases that were initially rejected reconsidered. It is unclear how this 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.
The Lawyers’ Response
Emily Soothill, of Deighton Pierce Glynn, welcomed the judge’s 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. 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.”
Elizabeth Cole, a solicitor at Duncan Lewis, whose asylum seeker client in France took part in the legal challenge, said: “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. 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.”
The Bottom Line
A High Court judge has ordered the Home Office to bring an alleged trafficking victim back to the UK after he was forcibly removed to France under the “one in, one out” scheme. The ruling quashes a Home Office policy that refused asylum seekers the right to have their trafficking claims reconsidered after an initial rejection. The decision could affect other people removed under the scheme. The Home Office is considering whether to appeal.
