High Court Rules Home Office Trafficking Reconsideration Policy Unlawful: What the France Removal Judgment Means
In Brief
If you are facing removal to France after a negative trafficking or modern slavery decision, a new High Court judgment may be highly relevant, but it does not automatically stop removal. On 10 July 2026, the High Court held that the Home Secretary acted unlawfully when statutory modern slavery guidance was amended to remove the right to request reconsideration of a negative trafficking decision for people being removed to a country that is party to key European human rights and trafficking conventions.
The ruling matters because a negative National Referral Mechanism decision does not normally carry a conventional statutory appeal. Reconsideration can be an important way to correct errors, raise overlooked evidence or submit significant new medical, psychological or trafficking evidence. OTS Solicitors’ asylum and human rights solicitors advise people facing removal, detention, negative trafficking decisions and urgent judicial review challenges.
The judgment does not mean that every France removal decision is unlawful. It does not mean that every person with a negative trafficking decision automatically has a right to stay in the UK. If you have removal directions, are detained, or have received a negative reasonable grounds or conclusive grounds decision, you need urgent advice on the specific Home Office decisions affecting you, the evidence available and whether reconsideration, a pre-action protocol letter, judicial review or interim relief may be appropriate.
For urgent immigration, asylum, trafficking and removal advice, call OTS Solicitors on 0203 959 9123.
What Was the High Court Case About?
The case was AYA, EXR, GIP, HRE and KAG v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWHC 1742 (Admin), handed down by Mr Justice Sheldon on 10 July 2026. The claimants were anonymised and challenged a number of Home Office decisions connected with proposed or actual removal to France and negative trafficking decisions.
The central common issue was whether the Home Office had acted lawfully by amending its modern slavery guidance so that a person with a negative reasonable grounds or conclusive grounds trafficking decision could not request reconsideration where the Secretary of State intended to remove them to an ECHR and ECAT signatory state, such as France.
The UK-France removal arrangements
The judgment refers to the UK-France Treaty and the Home Office’s internal name for the arrangements, Operation Hillmore. The arrangements concern people who may be removed to France in certain circumstances, including where an asylum claim has been treated as inadmissible or where a human rights claim has been certified. The judgment did not decide that every use of the UK-France arrangements is unlawful.
This distinction is important. You may see headlines suggesting that the judgment stops removals to France. That is not what the judgment says. The court was looking at a specific policy amendment and a number of individual decisions. If your case is affected, the legal position will depend on the decisions issued to you, the evidence in your case and whether any urgent procedural step is needed before removal.
Negative trafficking decisions under the National Referral Mechanism
The National Referral Mechanism is the framework used in the UK to identify and support potential victims of trafficking and modern slavery. There are two key stages. A reasonable grounds decision asks whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that a person may be a victim. A conclusive grounds decision is the later decision on whether the person is recognised as a victim.
If you receive a negative decision, the consequences can be serious. It may affect support, removal risk, human rights arguments and the way the Home Office approaches your case. Unlike some immigration decisions, a negative trafficking decision does not usually come with a normal statutory right of appeal. That is why reconsideration can matter.
The Home Office change to the reconsideration policy
At the time of writing, the Home Office’s modern slavery statutory guidance page states that the reconsideration policy for negative reasonable grounds and conclusive grounds decisions is under review. The High Court judgment concerns the earlier policy amendment that removed access to reconsideration for people being removed to certain states.
In practical terms, the removed reconsideration route was a safety mechanism. It allowed a decision-maker to look again at a negative trafficking decision where there may have been an error, where guidance may have been misapplied, or where new evidence had become available.
What Did the High Court Decide?
The High Court held that removing the right to request reconsideration in the relevant category of cases was unlawful. The court concluded that the amendment weakened the system for identifying trafficking victims and was not saved by the possibility that judicial review or interim relief might be available.
The court’s reasoning is important for people facing removal because trafficking evidence often emerges late. There may be trauma, fear of authorities, language barriers, detention, mental health difficulties, lack of legal advice or difficulty obtaining documents. A process that prevents reconsideration may make it harder for genuine evidence to be assessed before removal.
Why judicial review was not a complete substitute
Judicial review is a powerful remedy, but it is not the same as reconsideration. Judicial review usually examines whether a decision or process was lawful. It does not ordinarily involve the court simply substituting its own trafficking decision for the Home Office decision. It can also be urgent, complex and costly, especially where removal is imminent.
Reconsideration, by contrast, can allow the competent authority to revisit the substance of the trafficking decision where relevant evidence has been overlooked or where new evidence changes the picture. That is why the loss of reconsideration was significant.
The judgment did not invalidate every Home Office decision
The judgment must be read carefully. The court found the policy amendment unlawful and found that the unlawful policy made a real difference in two of the claimants’ cases. However, several individual challenges concerning inadmissibility, certification and the substance of trafficking decisions did not succeed.
This means that anyone affected still needs individual advice. The question is not simply whether the policy was unlawful. The question is whether the unlawful policy affected your case, whether your trafficking evidence should be reconsidered, whether removal directions remain in place, and whether urgent court action is required.
Does the Judgment Stop Removals to France?
The judgment does not create an automatic blanket suspension of all removals to France. It also does not automatically cancel every removal direction or every inadmissibility decision. The practical position may depend on the consequential order made by the court, any appeal, any stay, and any replacement Home Office guidance.
If you have already been given removal directions, you should not assume that the judgment alone protects you. You may need urgent advice on whether to submit further evidence, request reconsideration, send a pre-action protocol letter, issue judicial review proceedings or apply for interim relief to prevent removal while the legal challenge is considered.
Why timing is critical
Removal cases move quickly. If a person is detained, deadlines may be short and documents may be difficult to access. Family members may not have copies of the relevant notices or decisions. In our experience, delay can make urgent public law work more difficult because the solicitor needs time to identify the decision being challenged, obtain evidence and prepare any application for interim relief.
Can You Request Reconsideration of a Negative Trafficking Decision?
Whether you can request reconsideration will depend on the current Home Office guidance, the stage of your case and the decisions you have received. The judgment makes clear that reconsideration can be an important part of a fair trafficking identification system, but it does not mean that every request will succeed.
A reconsideration request may be relevant where the original decision did not consider material evidence, misunderstood the trafficking account, applied the wrong test, failed to consider vulnerability, or where new evidence has become available after the negative decision.
New evidence may include medical reports, psychological assessments, Rule 35 material, witness statements, evidence from a first responder, country evidence, expert evidence, records of exploitation, or evidence explaining delayed disclosure or inconsistencies.
Reconsideration and judicial review compared
| Issue | Reconsideration | Judicial review |
| Purpose | Asks the competent authority to look again at a negative trafficking decision. | Asks the court to examine the legality of a decision, policy or procedure. |
| Evidence | May be suitable where new or overlooked evidence should be assessed. | Usually focuses on legal error, irrationality, fairness or unlawfulness. |
| Urgency | May be part of urgent representations, but should not be assumed to stop removal automatically. | May be needed urgently where removal is imminent and interim relief is required. |
| Outcome | The Home Office may maintain or change the trafficking decision. | The court may grant relief if the decision or process is unlawful. |
What to Do if You Are Facing Removal to France
If you or a family member is facing removal to France and there is a trafficking or modern slavery issue, the practical priority is to gather documents and take advice quickly. Do not wait for removal to be imminent if you already have a negative decision or removal notice.
- Keep every Home Office decision, detention document and removal notice.
- Identify the scheduled removal date and any response deadline.
- Obtain the full negative reasonable grounds or conclusive grounds decision.
- Record what trafficking evidence was submitted and what appears to have been overlooked.
- Gather any new medical, psychological, witness or country evidence.
- Ask a solicitor whether a reconsideration request is available and appropriate.
- Obtain urgent advice on a pre-action protocol letter, judicial review and interim relief where removal is imminent.
- Do not assume that submitting evidence automatically suspends removal.
- Tell your solicitor immediately if the person has already been transferred to France.
- Check whether the Home Office has issued revised guidance after the judgment.
OTS Solicitors can advise on urgent immigration detention, bail and removal matters, including cases involving negative trafficking decisions, removal directions and evidence that has not been properly considered.
What if You Have Already Been Removed to France?
The position for people already removed to France may be complex. The available remedy will depend on the decision being challenged, whether UK proceedings remain active, whether the trafficking evidence was before the Home Office, whether there is new evidence, and what consequential order has been made following the judgment.
In some cases, it may be necessary to consider whether the Home Office should reopen a decision or whether existing proceedings can continue. In other cases, the practical and legal position may depend on what has happened in France since removal. This is highly fact-sensitive and should not be approached on assumptions.
OTS Solicitors’ View
The judgment is an important reminder that speed in the removal process cannot replace a fair and effective system for identifying victims of trafficking. Where a person may be a victim of trafficking, the process for considering that evidence must be robust enough to identify mistakes and consider significant new material.
However, the decision does not automatically resolve every individual case or cancel every removal direction. If you are affected, you need to identify the exact Home Office decisions in your case, preserve the relevant evidence and take advice on the correct procedural route. Depending on the facts, that may involve reconsideration, further representations, a pre-action protocol letter, judicial review or interim relief.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the High Court judgment mean the UK-France removal scheme is unlawful?
No. The court found that the particular amendment removing access to trafficking reconsideration was unlawful. It did not hold that every aspect of the UK-France arrangements or every removal decision was unlawful.
Can I now appeal a negative trafficking decision?
A negative National Referral Mechanism decision does not normally carry a conventional statutory appeal. Depending on the facts, reconsideration or judicial review may be available.
Will a reconsideration request stop my removal?
You should not assume that a reconsideration request automatically suspends removal. If removal is imminent, urgent advice may be needed on interim relief.
What evidence can support reconsideration?
Potential evidence may include medical reports, psychological assessments, witness evidence, first responder records, expert evidence and documents explaining delayed disclosure or apparent inconsistencies.
What if the Home Office has already given me a removal date?
Seek urgent legal advice. A solicitor will need to review the removal notice, trafficking decision, human rights claim, inadmissibility decision and any deadlines.
Does the judgment help someone who has already been sent to France?
Potentially, but it will depend on the individual decisions, evidence, any active proceedings and the court’s consequential orders. Bespoke advice is needed.
Can the Home Office appeal?
The Home Office may seek permission to appeal. The appeal and stay position should be checked before any legal step is taken or any article is published.
Contact OTS Solicitors
If you are facing removal to France, have received a negative trafficking decision, are detained, or need urgent advice on asylum, modern slavery, removal or judicial review, call OTS Solicitors on 0203 959 9123 or contact us.