The High Court has delivered a significant setback to Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s flagship “one in, one out” migrant returns agreement with France, blocking the deportation of an Eritrean man just hours before the first scheduled removal flight was due to depart on Wednesday morning.
The 25-year-old asylum seeker, who arrived in the UK by small boat on 12 August, won his eleventh-hour legal challenge at the High Court on Tuesday evening. Mr Justice Sheldon ruled that the man should be granted “a short period of interim relief” after his lawyers successfully argued he needed more time to present evidence that he might have been a victim of modern slavery.
The landmark ruling represents the first legal challenge to the UK-France returns deal since it came into force on 4 August, less than four weeks after Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron announced the pilot scheme during Macron’s three-day state visit to Britain in July.
“Real Risk of Destitution” Warning
Sonali Naik KC, representing the unnamed Eritrean man, told the court that her client faces a “real risk of destitution” if deported to France. She argued there was “a serious issue to be tried” about whether the man would become homeless if returned, noting that approximately one-third of asylum seekers in France are not provided with accommodation and receive only a daily allowance of 7.50 euros (£6.30).
The barrister told the court that a decision under the national referral mechanism, which identifies and assesses victims of slavery and human trafficking, was still pending. Ms Naik said the case “concerns a trafficking claim” and that her client, who alleges he has a gunshot wound in his leg, claims he is vulnerable.
“We are not dealing with a charter flight; it is simply a postponement,” Ms Naik told the court, emphasising that her client was seeking only temporary relief until his case could be fully heard.
Government Defence Fails to Convince Court
Kate Grange KC, representing the Home Office, argued in written submissions that it was reasonable to expect the Eritrean man to claim asylum in France. She revealed that the man had travelled to Italy in April 2025 before moving through France and arriving in the UK in August.
“The claimant asserts that he was destitute, but no less than two charities had indicated they would provide him with accommodation if he claimed asylum,” Ms Grange stated. “It is no answer that the claimant had friends who had claimed asylum and were living on the street, or that he wasn’t sure how long accommodation was being offered.”
The Government’s barrister stressed the urgency of addressing illegal Channel crossings, telling the court that in 2024 alone, 78 people directly linked to attempted Channel crossings had died. She added grimly: “Just this week, two children were crushed to death in the bottom of a boat.”
Empty Flights Embarrass Government
The legal victory for the asylum seeker came as further embarrassment mounted for the Government, with reports confirming that a second Air France flight departed from Heathrow on Tuesday without any migrants on board, following similar scenes on Monday. Sources suggest the Government had booked several spaces on flights this week with the intention of returning migrants as part of the landmark deal agreed with France.
Government lawyers admitted during the hearing that implementation would face inevitable limitations. Ms Grange conceded: “It is inevitable that not all asylum seekers potentially within scope for removal will be removed because of the inevitable limits on capacity and the nature of the scheme.”
Downing Street Remains Defiant
Despite the setback, Downing Street insisted it expects deportations to begin “imminently” under the UK’s migrant returns deal with France. The Prime Minister’s official spokesman maintained the Government’s position on Tuesday, stating: “As we’ve been saying the last couple of days, we have actually made the first detentions under the scheme and expect the first returns to take place imminently, but for obvious reasons we’re not going to get into a running commentary on operational details ahead of that.”
The spokesperson rejected suggestions that the returns deal was a “shambles” or that ministers were powerless in the face of the courts. They told reporters the Government would “continue to do whatever it takes” to ensure the returns deal succeeded and that they were prepared to fight any further legal challenges.
Details of the Controversial Deal
The “one in, one out” agreement, announced during Macron’s state visit in July, represents a pilot scheme designed to deter dangerous Channel crossings. Under the arrangement, the UK will send asylum seekers who have crossed the Channel back to France, in exchange for accepting an equal number of migrants from France who have legitimate asylum claims and British family connections.
Initially, the scheme was expected to cover approximately 50 returns per week, though British officials have remained tight-lipped about exact numbers. The treaty governing the pilot scheme will remain in force until June 2026, with both countries committed to continually reviewing and improving the process.
For migrants in France wanting to come to the UK legally under the scheme, they must submit an Expression of Interest application online. They need to establish their identity and nationality satisfactorily and undergo strict security and eligibility checks. Crucially, anyone who arrives by small boat and is returned to France will not be eligible for the legal route to the UK.
Record Crossings Fuel Political Pressure
The legal challenge comes against a backdrop of record-breaking Channel crossings, with more than 21,000 people arriving on small boats this year alone. This marks the earliest point in a calendar year at which the 20,000 mark has been passed since data on crossings was first reported in 2018, putting 2025 on course to be a record year for crossings.
The soaring numbers have become a major political headache for Starmer, whose popularity has fallen since winning an election landslide last year. The Prime Minister faces mounting pressure from Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party, which currently leads in national opinion polls and has made stopping small boat crossings a central campaign issue.
Opposition politicians were quick to criticise the Government’s handling of the situation. Sources close to the Conservative Party described the pilot scheme as “pathetic” compared to their previous Rwanda deterrent plan, arguing that the new arrangement would not effectively deter Channel crossings.
Screening Interview Revelations
Court documents revealed details about the Eritrean man’s journey and his initial screening interview with British officials. He told authorities he had not been exploited and had been paid when working as a labourer in Libya. When asked why he had not sought asylum before arriving in the UK, the man said he had seen people sleeping on the streets in Europe and had concluded there was no support available.
Officials maintained he should have claimed asylum in France because he was not under the control of trafficking gangs. However, his legal team argued that delaying his departure could prevent a miscarriage of justice if trafficking concerns were later substantiated.
The Home Office warned that granting delays could encourage others allocated to return flights this week to come forward and make similar claims, potentially undermining the entire scheme’s deterrent effect.
Immigration Enforcement Preparations
Immigration Enforcement had set aside space at Immigration Removal Centres in preparation for the returns, while Border Force had developed an operational strategy to identify and process groups of inadmissible migrants for removal. The Government said it had learned lessons from the lengthy legal challenges that derailed the previous Conservative government’s Migration and Economic Development Partnership with Rwanda.
Since coming to power, the Labour government has increased illegal working enforcement activity by 51 per cent, with 10,031 visits leading to 7,130 arrests. Ministers have promised a major nationwide blitz targeting illegal working hotspots, focusing on the gig economy and migrants working as delivery riders. New biometric kits are being rolled out for Immigration Enforcement teams to conduct on-the-spot checks.
Diplomatic Implications
The returns deal holds significant diplomatic importance for Starmer, who has sought to reset Britain’s relationship with European partners since negotiating a trade deal with the EU in May. The agreement with France pursues what Ms Grange described in court as “an important public objective” in addressing the grave social and political concern of dangerous Channel crossings.
French Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau had previously stated on social media that the agreement has a “clear objective” to break up people-smuggling networks. The EU Commission, Germany and other partners have reportedly given the green light to this innovative approach to deter illegal migration and prevent criminal smuggling networks operating across Europe.
However, French officials have privately expressed concerns about the deal, with some cautioning it could result in France becoming a “return hub” for migrants that the UK refuses to accept. The policy also carries political risks for Macron from right-wing critics who question why France has agreed to take back migrants wanting to live in Britain.
Legal Precedent Concerns
The High Court ruling sets a potentially significant precedent for future challenges to the returns scheme. Immigration lawyers suggest that the decision to grant interim relief based on pending trafficking claims could open the door to similar applications from other migrants facing deportation under the deal.
The case highlights the complex legal framework surrounding asylum claims and the various protections available to potential trafficking victims. The national referral mechanism process, which can take several months to complete, may prove a significant obstacle to the Government’s ambitions for swift returns.
Legal experts note that the UN Refugee Convention, which mandates asylum seekers’ rights to request protection, could provide grounds for further challenges to the scheme. The Government’s admission that not all potential removals will be possible due to capacity limitations may also be cited in future cases.
What Happens Next
The Eritrean man’s case will now proceed to a full hearing, where the court will consider the substantive issues around his potential trafficking claim and risk of destitution in France. The timeline for this hearing has not been announced, but it could take several weeks or months before a final decision is reached.
Meanwhile, the Government must decide whether to proceed with other planned deportations or await the outcome of this test case. Sources suggest ministers are prepared to robustly defend any further legal challenges, having anticipated resistance to the scheme based on the experience with the Rwanda plan.
The Home Office is expected to continue detaining migrants identified for removal under the scheme, with Immigration Enforcement maintaining allocated spaces at removal centres. However, each case will need to be assessed individually for potential legal vulnerabilities that could lead to similar challenges.
As the legal battles unfold, the pressure continues to mount on Starmer’s government to demonstrate progress on its promise to stop the boats and restore order to Britain’s immigration system. With record numbers continuing to cross the Channel and Reform UK capitalising on public concerns about immigration, the success or failure of the returns deal could have significant political ramifications for the Prime Minister’s struggling administration.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
Image Credit:
Keir Starmer visits Northern Ireland (8 July 2024) — photo by Simon Dawson / No 10 Downing Street, OGL 3.0.
