The man, who cannot be named, is bringing a claim against the Home Office on Thursday ahead of his scheduled removal from the UK at 6.15am on Friday
A second migrant challenging his proposed deportation to France under the Government’s “one in, one out” policy is due to be removed from the country early on Friday, the High Court has been told. The man, who cannot be named, is bringing a claim against the Home Office on Thursday ahead of his scheduled removal from the UK at 6.15am on Friday.
An Eritrean man successfully asked the court on Tuesday to temporarily block his deportation after a judge found there was a “serious issue to be tried” over whether his removal was lawful amid claims he had been trafficked. The second legal bid comes after the first return of a migrant to France under the scheme took place on Thursday, with further flights scheduled in the coming days, following the cancellation of planned flights earlier this week.
At a hearing in London, Sonali Naik KC, representing the unnamed man, said he was an “alleged trafficking victim”. She said: “The removal directions are set for 6.15 tomorrow morning.”
She continued: “The serious issue to be tried is whether this is the appropriate way for the Secretary of State to conduct litigation with vulnerable individuals.” The man was granted anonymity during Thursday’s hearing, with judge Mr Justice Sheldon saying the individual has “a number of different medical needs and he asserts he has been a victim of trafficking”.
The judge also said the man had provided details to the court about his “journey from Eritrea”. The Home Office is opposing the bid, with its barristers claiming there is “no serious issue to be tried”.
Ministers agreed on the pilot scheme with the French government in July as part of efforts to deter the record number of arrivals by small boat crossings so far this year. More than 31,000 people have arrived in the UK after making the dangerous journey in 2025.
The first detentions of migrants took place last month as the deal came into force, and they have been held at an immigration removal centre pending their removal from the country. Under the arrangement, the UK will return asylum seekers to France who have crossed the Channel, in exchange for those who apply and are approved to come to Britain.
The first arrivals to come to the UK under the new route are expected to arrive in the coming days. On Tuesday, barristers for the first migrant to challenge his proposed removal as part of the scheme at the High Court said he faces a “real risk of destitution” in France if he is deported.
The court heard that the case “concerns a trafficking claim” and that the man, who alleges he has a gunshot wound in his leg, claims he is vulnerable. During the hearing, the national referral mechanism (NRM) – which identifies and assesses victims of slavery and human trafficking – found that the man had likely not been trafficked, but offered him time to make further representations.
Mr Justice Sheldon ruled there was not a “real risk” that the man would “suffer destitution if he was to be returned to France”. But he said: “There is a serious issue to be tried as to whether or not the removal decision is lawful in circumstances where there is still room for further investigation into the trafficking claim being brought by the claimant.”
The judge ordered that the case return to court “as soon as is reasonably practical in light of the further representations that the claimant… will make on his trafficking decision”. The Home Office has since announced it will seek to appeal against the ruling, with Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood stating that she would “fight to end vexatious, last-minute claims”.
On Thursday, Ms Naik said that solicitors acting for her client have “acted responsibly since they were instructed” in the claim. Ms Naik also said they had been “subject to overt criticism by the Home Secretary”.
The department has also since said that it has revised its policy on reconsidering modern slavery decisions because Ms Mahmood said the use of modern slavery legislation to block deportations made a “mockery of our laws”. The Home Office has updated the policy so that anyone being removed to a safe country who wants to appeal an NRM decision will be unable to do so.
Instead, they can appeal via judicial review from another country, such as France. Ms Naik said: “The Secretary of State has today come to this court to say, without notice to the claimant, that the procedures in France are fine, it is all safe, no problems, the trafficking claims will be dealt with.
“Our prima facie case is that the Secretary of State needs assurances from France that that is the case, that non-French nationals trafficked in Libya will have access to the NRM there.” The judge said that the claimant’s concern was that a decision had been made “in haste” due to wanting to remove him.
In response, Sian Reeves, for the Home Office, told the court: “There is no arguable public law error in the Secretary of State proceeding in the way that she did in the circumstances of this case, where she had ample information.”
She continued: “In short, the trafficking claim can be investigated in France. His rights are protected in France.”
Looking for more from MyLondon? Subscribe to our daily newsletters here for the latest and greatest updates from across London.
