🔗 Share this article

An Eritrea-born asylum seeker has secured a last-minute legal injunction temporarily stopping his removal to France pursuant to the disputed 'one in, one out' treaty.

The 25-year-old, who came in the UK through a Channel crossing on August 12, had been due to be returned midweek in accordance with the removal trial scheme negotiated during summer by the British and French governments.

As part of the initial legal challenge opposing the arrangement, considered at the Royal Courts of Justice, his lawyers argued that he required more time to provide documentation supporting he was potentially a survivor of human trafficking – and that the decision to remove him had been hurried.

Lawyers for the Home Office asserted that he might have applied for asylum in France and presented lacking evidence explaining why it was an unsafe safe destination for him.

The government’s side additionally warned that delaying his removal could encourage others allocated to upcoming deportation journeys to file claims with parallel arguments, thereby compromising the policy aim of deterring dangerous illegal voyages.

But over the course of the hearing, it emerged that even though the Home Secretary’s own caseworkers had denied his exploitation allegation, they had nonetheless stated in a recent communication that he had the option to provide further evidence – and that they could not anticipate him to complete that process from French soil.

This development led the presiding judge to approve a temporary halt on the claimant’s removal, even though denying his argument that he would be rendered homeless in France.

"It constitutes a serious question to be adjudicated in regard to the exploitation allegation and how the government has conducted her investigatory duties in a proper fashion," he stated.

The judge additionally noted that if there was a credible belief that the individual had been exploited – a situation that would not specifically involve France – it would amount to a formal prohibition to return for at least a short period.

The court order raises important questions about whether other asylum seekers designated for deportation flights may employ identical grounds to challenge or prevent their transport away from the United Kingdom – or if they are being exposed to hurried procedures.

The claimant, who may not be named for legal reasons, according to documents exited his home country two years ago and arrived the Italian Republic in April 2025.

Several weeks afterward, he moved to France, where he was assisted by charities including the relief agencies, prior to his mother reportedly paid $1,400 (approximately £1,024) to traffickers for his small boat journey to the United Kingdom.

During the legal case, it was stated that he informed interviewers during his initial assessment that he had never been exploited and had been compensated when he labored as a laborer in Libya.

Upon being questioned why he had not seek asylum before coming the UK, the individual responded that he had witnessed people sleeping on the outdoors in European nations and had formed the view that there was no support offered.

Government representatives contended that he should have claimed asylum in the French territory since he was free from under the influence of illegal networks.

However, defense counsel, arguing on his behalf, asserted that the UK authorities had not yet fully investigated whether her the claimant was a survivor of trafficking – and that there had been insufficient assessment of whether returning him to the French nation would render him destitute.

Regarding the Migrant Exchange Deal

The 'one in, one out' initiative was introduced in recently by the UK leader and France’s head of state.

Under the treaty, the French government agreed to take back individuals who had crossed to the UK by illegal means and had their asylum claims declared inadmissible.

For exchange, the British authorities would receive someone with a qualifying claim for refugee status who had never tried to travel via the English Channel.

So far, no-one has been removed via the arrangement. The first repatriations to France had been expected to commence this week.

During the recent two weeks, some asylum seekers being held in government holding sites were given documents indicating that they would be put on a commercial airline departing from a UK airport for the French capital at 9am this morning.

Yet, several sources revealed that some of the scheduled migrants had been informed that their removal would be deferred as further appeals regarding their cases were being made.

When asked by journalists – ahead of the legal outcome – if the scheme was a "shambles", a spokesperson representative replied "not at all".

They added that the administration was "certain" in the lawful grounds for the experimental initiative, and that they had "taken actions to guarantee it's consistent with national and international law; as with any initiative, we're ready to respond